I found something that made me pause in the latest Image File Wrapper postings for the '336 dated with todays date. They list the related litigation among which is this listing:

Patriot Scientific Corp. v. Charles H. Moore, et al., filed on or about February 13, 2004 in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, Case No. C04 0618 JF (HRL). Stipulated final jugement that Charles Moore is a co-inventor and that TPL is co-owner of the U.S. 5,809,336 filed on June 9, 2005.

I was just wondering if what Moore claims to be true that TPL does NOT in fact own the patents, but is merely the agent who is licensing them for him, does that potentially throw this stipulated judgement and the TPL/PTSC relationship into question? I assume that it probably means nothing.

But for discussion purposes, I was wondering, if PTSC agreed to a stipulated judgement that was based on an unsound legal agreement between TPL & Moore, what repurcussions would that have on the Commercialization Agreement, and this stipluated judgement in the eyes of the court?

Any educated thoughts woudl be welcome.