Unless and until someone reads the complaint that PTSC filed against TPL all we know is what PTSC wants us to know and what Chuck Moore alleges:

From PTSC 10K

On April 22, 2010 we filed a second action against TPL and Alliacense LLC in Santa Clara Superior Court alleging claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, and interference with contract, constructive fraud, for preliminary and permanent injunctions and for an accounting

Is it reasonable or unreasonable to believe that Moore's complaint, filed after PTSC's complaint, may include similar language contained in the PTSC complaint?:

From Moore's complaint (paraphrased):

Upon info and belief revenues generated by the MMP portfolio were diverted by TPL to support its business expansion into other non related portfolios

Employees at Alliacense grew from approx 20 employees (a number more than sufficient to serve the TPL/Alliacense MMP portfolio licensing effort) to over 50 employees

TPL leased more elaborate and more expensive office space, TPL hired expensive business development personnel to seek additional portfolio opportunities

Upon info and belief, all or substantially all of such expenses were borne by the MMP portfolio and the revenues it continued to generate

TPL departed from the realm of prudent and reasonable business expenses (private jets, first class travel, limos purchased, chauffered limo service, substantial meal, entertainment & travel expenses, etc.)

Moore is informed and believes that TPL made excessive and exorbitant expenditures for legal fees.....and made secret and undisclosed profits and revenues by reason of such legal fees.

If any of what Moore charges is true, then please tell me if you believe the red flags were there for our forensic account and other BoD members to see. I believe that if we could see the PTSC complaint against TPL we might have some answers. If Moore is correct and if PTSC has NOT addressed these issues in its complaint, I'd like to know why.