Against my better judgement, because you seem to convolute a lot of what you come across - point by point -

"but could and had stood up to scrutiny by the biggest guys in tech and it was a clear win for everyone."

It HAS stood up to the scrutiny of 23 licensees so far. If you misjudged and thought that meant everything was a slam dunk, you were very naive.

"Fish gained 7/9 million to ensure we were safe with the patent portfolio that PTSC controlled"

I don't even know what you're saying here. Are you saying Fish got 7 or 9 million dollars? Fish got $6million and an earn-out, but what's that got to do with anything. It has no bearing on our lawsuit, shareprice, or whatever. When Fish was suing us it had a negative effect on the sp. And now that the lawsuit is settled it doesn't. Can you dispute that? What's false about anything here.

"As I recall in the words of David Pohl, PTSC had hopes of getting on a major exchange, umbrella concept/holding company, and significant cash/revenue was imminent"

My understanding is that moving to another exchange (I don't think "major" was used) is still a goal. They are working on the umbrella thingy, and significant cash has been received.

"the millions of shares added that created lower EPS"

The millions of shares were added long before the run from .06 to $2. In fact, the fully diluted has gone down from 420 million to around 390 million. That's a good thing.

"and the tremendous impact of the trial. "

You were in the military how many years? So you are not a young man. And you didn't understand that when companies go to trial that someone may win, the other will lose, and that the uncertainty may have a negative affect on the companies involved? If you didn't understand this, then you definitely should not be invested in a penny stock.