FWIW, you're not the only ignored party.  On the date the settlements were made public, I sent an e-mail to IR "complaining" about the fact that Turley issued a note commenting on the "joint" PR that was issued re: the settlements, while in fact there was nothing "joint" about them.  Alliacense had posted them on their website, TPL and the J's were in the title of the PR's, but PTSC was NOT, nor had PTSC posted them to their website.   Most of the same stuff I posted here at that time.

I felt my concerns were legitimate, and dealt only with things PTSC COULD control, ie the inclusion of its name in the title of the PR since it IS one of the plaintiffs in the resolved litigation, its posting of the PR on its own website since the information was already public (vs me a shareholder having to know to go look at a private comapany's website to find info about my PUBLIC company's most important development), and what I felt was Turley's (since he's the CEO) subordination of concern of PTSC shareholders interests for the interests of a private company TPL/Alliacense (since he agreed to allow them to release the news long before PTSC did - should have been no worse than simultaneously IMO).

In anycase, I've never received a response to the e-mail.  A few hours after I sent the e-mail, the PR's were finallyy put on PTSC's website (after hours) and I sent a follow up e-mail thanking them for at least correcting that.  Still, I've never received any correspondence from them on these issues.

As you may remember, I also complained about the poor way the cancellation of the webcast was handled in early November.  There have been other instances of botches of simple communcations as well.  Most of these issues fall at the feet of Hawk IMO, though Turley has to have the buck stops here responsiblity as well.  Hawk on the other hand should be handling these things so easily, and yet they continue to fail pretty consistently.