"But Fut, if there were DEFINITE monies forthcoming, though in unknown/TBD amounts, wouldn't this HAVE TO be stated in some fashion in the 10Q?"

No.

To further my thoughts from yesterday, perhaps Turley decided to be very conservative when he (if it was he) decided that insiders should not be able to trade before the 10q came out. He may have concluded that since it was assumed that the licensing fees will come to a materially large amount, that that was enough to prevent insiders from trading, even though the amount had yet to be decided. It's possible that when Goerner came on board he had a different interpretation, hence his initial purchase of stock. It's possible everyone figured that the audit would be completed by the time the 10q was due, therefore Turley assumed that insiders would be able to trade by then as the info would be available for the 10q as a subsequent event. Obviously I am assuming the audit hadn't been completed in time to include any info in the 10q.

All just my complete speculation. I could be partly right, totally right or I could be dead wrong. It would certainly explain the conflicting info about insider trading.