I suggest that the time frame was made critical by the positive affirmations on both PDSG and the '336, which were reflected in the share price. There are too many coincidences for me to even contemplate that these initiatives were anything other than advanced.

The major complaint was the poor share price for which far ranging allegations were made to imply that the sole reason for it could be laid squarely on the BoD. If the sudden surge in price was caused by the PDSG updates it counters many of those allegations. Conversely, if it was because of the patent updates, it not only confirms that this was an area over which the BoD had no control, it also makes it the major contributory influence on the price.

As a consequence of the NIRC the pace of licensing should increase, as more cash becomes available to PTSC the price should rise correspondingly. This would happen no matter who was on the BoD, so the avowed intent to increase shareholder value as the basis for nomination becomes moot, at best.

You return yet again to concerns about warrants, but no warrants exist, nor have done for some time, and I have yet to discover any options being awarded to the Falk Trust, of which Falk Jr was one beneficiary, there were others, and on your point about options would welcome your evidence of such to the Trust.

.

.

.

Be well