This is what PTSC's position was on 5/10/12 in their Frequently Asked Questions regarding dividends:

Patriot is not currently pursuing any acquisition opportunities. It has, and continues to, divest of interests in activities that have required continued uses of cash. While we believe Patriot currently has a relatively strong cash position, we continue to take measures to preserve resources so that we are as prepared as possible to support our interests in the MMP Portfolio and meet all challenges, both known and unforeseen. At this time a very important event in determining Patriot’s future will be the outcome in the current Northern California infringement litigation. A significant step in that process was the January 27, 2012 Markman hearing where claims construction arguments were presented to the court. Patriot is supportive of a strategy to return cash to its shareholders however, no action in this regard is expected to be undertaken until significant uncertainties surrounding the business, litigation, and the licensing program are resolved. We, like our shareholders, anxiously await the court’s ruling from the Markman hearing.

Based on that, it does suggest there are strategic milestones that would be, in their minds, the launching point for a restart to the dividend program. I, for one, would appreciate, and I believe it would be a help to the share price, if a little more clarity and definition as to what they mean by "significant uncertainties" was provided.

With respect to the business, was that in reference to the reworking of the partnership agreements that were announced on July 17th? With respect to litigation, were they referring to the Markman ruling they so anxiously were awaiting that was issued (at least mostly issued in June)? Or do they mean that litigation needs to be resolved either through a verdict or settlement of some sort? With respect to the licensing program, what are they referring to. Is this perhaps a reference to the negotiations that must've been ongoing that the time this was published to rework the partnership agreements with Alliacence?

I guess this is what I'm getting at with respect to trying to understand what might help support a share price increase. For posters here, I'd ask, where do you get your information regarding the status of PTSC's legal proceedings? Are you learning of those from PTSC, or are you getting those from l2007s and Wolfpack and BaNosser's postings of that info? IMO, it would be helpful to have a page on their website that was a source for ongoing updates to the legal proceedings similar to the one Rambus has.

There are positive things PTSC CAN do that while they may or may not actually result in a pps increase, would improve the communication by the company, the sense of transparency, and IMO, would likely serve to begin to repair the oh-so-obviously sorely lacking trust in the management of this company.

Positive, proactive, consistent and clear, well diseminated communication by the company would help the company's image, and combat my oh-so-evil conspiracy to destroy PTSC....bwahahahahahah!!! lol (had to include that for certain posters here).

These are relatively simple opportunities to support the company, and its shareholders, that for some reason PTSC doesn't take advantage of. They're not expensive measures by any means, but they would allow PTSC to control the public narrative about it and generate interest in the company. Are they interested in doing everything they can to return value to the shareholder, or simply doing as little as they can get away with and collect their checks? I think they can do more even in the secretive environment they've fostered, and I believe at the least, it would help shareholders to understand the process we're currently in, rather than relying on posters on a message board to try to piece it together.