Could the reason be that it was mutually dismissed without any settlement? That would explain the lack of PR from TPL or PTSC and the falling share price.

Here's the problem that occurs often on this board. A mutual decision to dismiss is a "settlement." A settlement does not necessarily involve sums of money paid to one party or the other. While those sums are often called "settlements" they are not always part of a settlement. So even if a PR said there was a settlement, until it explicitly states a monetary settlement or license, we still know nothing.

All too often this board reads into a press release or filing what it wants to rather than what is written. Between-the-lines speculation along with creative parsing of language has given rise to many misconceptions.

It's at 0.15 only because it had a run to 0.25 based on speculation/rumor and has since fallen back on uncertainty.

Hard to understand how we can be at 15 pennies when we have patents on water

Unless I'm mistaken, no one has ever made a penny from a patent on water. This comparison is unbelievably poor and Leckrone or whoever it was that came up with it was a fool to do so.

When there is supposed to be waves of licensing activity. When the Markman hearing supported our 336 patent and the Patent Office has supported our 336 patent which supposedly impacts virtually every microprocessor in the world. Take the 336 story and look what our BoD has done with it. What are they doing?????

While I agree with those that think the BoD has failed repeatedly, after a while you have to wonder about exactly what is going on here. Afterall, if TPL, who has played our BoD like a set of fiddles and appear to be as venal as they come, can't rake in the promised "big bucks" either, something beyond mere BoD incompetence has to be going on. The BoD is 100% at fault for squandering PTSC money less at fault for lack of licenses. They weren't responsible for bringing in licenses so I don't see how they can be responsible for the lack thereof either.