If so then why would not ARM be required to agree with the Continuance,

 EASE if I remember correctly you're usually on the wrong side of this stock 

selling before it rises and  buying at highs just to see it fall.

  I've done pretty well  here being realistic and although I realize that perhaps I never sold any shares at 2 I was lucky to buy 100k at .04 and another at .08 and have turned those over at higher and higher prices,

My latetst buy in was around 46 cents after I had posted that we wer going to 

fill the gap at 43 cents  I sold much the day it jumped to over 60 in germany and then fell to 58 cents on the NASD bought back t 50 and sold a bunch yesterday -since Ron told me too- at .58 and .585.

Yes I know I don't always see evertything  PTSC does through rose colored glass and I don't always get to sell at the highs.  But as I'm sure RonRan will agree The Bible clearly states that

 "In front of a blind man place no stumbling blocks"  which can also mean that we are required to remove stumbling blocks that others place as well.

My posts are meant to place devil's advocate.  

This is an OTC BB stock and my trading 50 - 100k shares  will in no way effect the price for more than the instant that the MM is 

attempting to rip me off. 

 Remember knowledge is power and you can reject anything anyone writes, but when you reject a cut and paste out of a PACER filing  that clearky states that ARM was not included in the agreement for continuance because TPL is stipulating to non-infringement without any substantiating documentary proof

then you are indeed placimng stumblng blocks in front of the any people on 

this board that jump into these investments blindly.

I would therefore appreciate that you either offer up proof that ARM is 

still being sued or you retract