And who has been assigned by the Judge to overseeing/manage PDS's banking activities? CJ. "Banking activities" - what other activity does PDS engage in?

But I suspect what you say may be correct with regard to (legal) activities that TPL was chartered with and funded for handling. I believe this would include PTO representation, as well as representation in active litigation (in court) with infringers. But IMO, management of these endeavors is more a matter of simply writing checks, and decision-making which (assuming establishment of resolution (i)) PDS was ultimately chartered with.

It all comes down to the basic unanswered question: can pursuit of infringers proceed while this litigation against TPL is in process?

It appears all the pieces remain intact to permit continued, perhaps even more agressive, pursuit. BUT....

Legal minds please advise/debate. This is THE question.

Can they?

Should they?

The other big question? I've twice commented about the pressures currently (especially after Thursday) being experienced by Lecky. Two disputes with PTSC. One with Moore. And how many creditors at his door? Criminal conduct allegations. His world may be caving in. Probably is.

PTSC withdrew from discussions. Would that change if the short guy showed up at their door? The "short guy" being Lecky on is knees, hat in hand.

Is this a possibility?

Is this a likely event? (again, especially after the rulings on Thursday, which IMO altered the landscape considerably).

SGE