So TPL needs PTSC to sign off on a potential license, which is what some here believe to have been agreed to based on the PR from February.

That should also translate to any possible settlement with the T3. Both parties (TPL and PTSC) should have to both agree to settle and grant the T3 a license for the MMP. If either one does not wish to settle, then the case should be allowed to continue.

I would hope that if PTSC does in fact have veto power on any would-be settlements/MMP licenses, then PTSC would realize they have a much larger base to please as opposed to the Leckrones and Moore.

The Leckrones have themselves. Moore has himself and possibly GreenArrays, which might make Moore want more to have enough capital to fully fund GreenArrays without having to rely on venture capitalists, or something similar.

PTSC, as a public company, has 100s of shareholders to please, which would require IMO a larger settlement number than what the Leckrones would be willing to go after due to the inherent risks of trials.

So if PTSC truly has veto power on any licenses regardless of engaging in litigation with the possible licensee, then PTSC should hold all parties to the fire (TPL and the T3).

Again, if in fact PTSC does have veto power now, then I think an SEC 8K notifying the PTSC shareholder base would go a long way to rebuilding the BOD's relationship with its shareholders.

GLTAL