Even in this filing, the requirement for a "majority" of PDS' management committee is concerning. Considering that committee is made up of Leckrone, Johnson, and a TPL employee who's name I forget. While a unanimous vote might create the possibility of obstruction by either TPL or PTSC, the majority rule still leaves PTSC at a disadvantage since they are outnumbered with the "independent" representative actually being a TPL person as well.

On April 20, 2010 the Management Committee of PDS passed resolutions specifying that (i) any and all future licenses of the MMP Patent Portfolio must be approved in writing by a majority of the members of the Management Committee before they are agreed to or signed by TPL and (ii) effective immediately, TPL must not market patent portfolios in which PDS does not have an interest with the MMP Patent Portfolio. The TPL representative on the PDS Management Committee voted against the resolutions, and TPL has not expressed its acquiescence to the resolutions.

Please explain how PTSC was disadvantaged.

.

.

.

Be well