Zecotek Photonics Inc ZMSPF

RE:Gap Down Friday Due to Negative Markman Order

[isame]

Sorry "what negative Markman order?"   There is no such thing as a "Markman order" anyway, only a Markman opinion or ruling.  Nor was there any "order against BOET".  

The text you quote has NOTHING WHATEVER  to to do with the Markman opinion.  There was a motion by the defendents to try to get Zecotek attorney Thomas  Loop removed from the case.   The grounds were trivial: he had filed some documents for final approval a Zecotek patent filing that started a year before the case began.   Technically , it might have been a violation of a rule not to do any patent work for Zecotek related  to the case but that even that is arguable because the patent was for photodetectors, not crystals.   

In any case, he didn't get removed from the case as they wished, just slapped on the wrist with the order to pay some legal costs of their billing time for the motion.  I'm guessing in the order of $10,000 or so maybe less but no big deal in terms of the real issues of the case. 

It should  be  noted that this is just one of many trivial motions filed by the defendants to try to slow down the wheels of justice. 

BOET was originally in the lawsuit together with Zecotek alhtough nothing really turns on BOET's involvement, they are just the Chinese crystal manufacturer.    They are now attemting to withdraw from the case so the amended complaint will be just Zecotek so thethe claims and counterclaims against BOET are agreed to be moot, that is irrelevant.  Get it? 

My friend,  you actually have to follow the court documents regularly and read them and understand them before posing inflamatory  and misleading statements on a BullBoard.   

You write: "Looks like the Markman went more against ZMS/BOET, than in their favour and the market is selling off the stock.  Hopefull, for ZMS and its shareholders, there won't be any large damages against them by the Defendants in the future."

Frankly you don't know what you're talking about.  Have you read the Markman and do you understand the issues?  There were 4 points discussed only one of which is really material to the trial.  That is the judges opinion section IIIA which deals with the issue of whether the patent applies to the "substance" i.e. the finished crystal or the "charge or melt" i.e. the intial chemical ingredients.  That's the key point on which the judge ruled in Zecotek's favour and the rest is relatively unimportant.