Re: e.Digital Corporation v. Huawei - dismissed with Prejudice/ Doni
posted on
Mar 03, 2015 12:00PM
He's not going to and has no obligation to.
Selling a physical product as we did in the past, now attemting ditto with IP for others to put in their products, is the normal course of business, with no SEC requirement either.
If I'm the decision maker at Intel, do I want my competition to know I'm looking into licensing EDIG's IP and incorporating the tech into my chips?
It is very obvious where I sit that EDIG is talking with Intel.
8-29-13 we get the presentation via Nunally...target market chip makers.
Cocumelli:Mr. Cocumelli's background also includes seven years at Intel Corporation as a manager in the Components Manufacturing Group and as Director of Corporate Training and Development. His activities at Intel included the start-up of four manufacturing facilities, the implementation of a corporate-wide training development system and management responsibility for over 300 employees in four domestic and overseas locations.
Fred said that day, "Allen remains with contacts at Intel."
How about that HINT?
Why these things take so long, no clue on my end, with others saying it's taking too long, of course, we want it now...me too.
After one gets to know a person, it's not difficult to know how the person will do this or that.
In my sales career, one of the customers bases were OEM's like HP, Compaq, NCR, Sony General Atomic (Preditor and other things)....the products I sold them were used to make their manufacturing lines operate such as conveyers, overhead crains, automation machinery and the like. It was our company policy not to disclose what we were selling to all these guys. If HP standardized on a 4 pole relay to activiate functions of their assembly machines, we did not tell the other guys, none of their business nor did management consider it professional.
Fred ain't gonna say nutin....which I agree with.
Appreciate your thoughts, but...my 2 cents.