Well im not easily intimidated

Ok. So much for good will. Yes, it was my sole intention to intimidate you (tongue in cheek). It had nothing to do with looking at the facts and realizing nothing is a slam dunk. Nor did it have anything to do with correcting the specialist comment, nor did it have anything to do with having more people actually read the claim construction briefs of both sides so investors get a better understanding of the core issues and attempt to discuss those issues in more detail on this forum.

Nah...I want to intimidate and that is my sole intention (tongue in cheek). The fact that you infer intimidation from my post could be the basis of an entirely new thread, but that would be off topic.