Ownership of the MMP is not affected by the filing of the Chapter 11 or even a Chapter 7 BK, as far as I understand it, unless through those proceedings, the court were to ultimately dispose/liquidate the MMP asset to fulfill a debt in some way. The only thing affected by either of those filings is the Commercialization Agreement and possibly (I haven't taken the time to verify) the Master Agreement.

As I posted yesterday, the OLD CommAg had a provision that a Chapter 7 BK filing would be grounds for termination of that agreement, and a Chapter 11 filing that also included TPL losing debtor in possession status, would be as well. A chapter 11 filing in and of itself would not be.

Again, that deals with the agreements between PTSC & TPL with respect to the commercialization, NOT the OWNERSHIP, of the MMP. Whether the recently revised agreements still include such language, I couldn't tell you. However, if they do still, it's my understanding that if the BK filing did result in the dissolution of the CommAg and other partnership agreements, then each patent owner, PTSC and TPL respectively, would then be free to license the patents on their own again, which based on where we're at in the proceedings, IMO would NOT be a preferred route or beneficial to us as PTSC shareholders, IMO. I don't think that's the ultimate endgame, but if it were to prove to be, I think we'd be hosed as, IMO, our leadership team doesn't stand a chance against the wheeling and dealing machinations of Leckrone. Like I said, I'd hope that's not the case and instead, this latest filing is simply the long expected outcome to work around TPL's other legal issues until the ITC & T3 proceedings can ultimately bring to a head the MMP victory or defeat.

Corrections welcome.