that PTSC and TPL came to a Settlement (2012) in the Fraud suit, just 9 months or so before TPL filed for Bankruptcy. I am convinced that TPL entered into the PTSC Settlement knowing that they would File BK very soon after, and that the following months allowed them the necessary latitude to get all their ducks in order and to avoid any hindsight Court review.

It suspends rational belief and makes a mockery of common sense, that PTSC, Gloria felcyn in particular, did not expect TPL would be filing for Bankruptcy at some point.

How would PTSC know ? Because Gloria herself, our Forensics CPA, did an inhouse inspection of TPL's financials, and personally concluded in a sworn Declaration to the Court in our Fraud case, that TPL needed to borrow money outside of that required under the Commercialization agreement, that PTSC did infact give "loans and other considerations to TPL in excess of $5,000,000", that TPL was "clearly insolvant", had "debts exceeding assets by over $30,000,000", "a monthly burn rate of $2,000,000" and "monthly negative cash flow of approx $1,000,000 per month".

Why does it matter ? It matters because knowing all the above in advance, Gloria and the BOD STILL entered into that 2012 Settlement agreement. I also contend that our BOD had every reasonable expectation to believe that TPL might at any time file for BK.

How is it impacting us now ? This comes back around to your post about Alliasence. Prior to the 2012 Settlement agreement, TPL was the MMP Licensor and Vendor, they in turn contracted with Alliasence for the reverse engineering and negotiating, etc. But it was TPL that had the 15% contract with PDS, not Alliasence. However, as a result of the Settlement agreement, Alliasence now became the 20% or 25% MMP Vendor with PDS.

It matters because had TPL filed for BK while they were still the MMP Licensor and Vendor, the BK court would have had jurisdiction over that Licensor/Vendor Commercialization agreement, and could have modified it, cancelled it or replaced it; and PDS would not still be held hostage by the lack of Work Product ownership, or gamesmanship leverage or high off the top uncontrolled overhead of DL or his operations/operatives.

As for Alliasence, don't forget that PTSC, and now the BK court will require that TPL too (with what is the Creditor's money), each pay to Alliasence at least $500,000 (semi-annually ?) for licensing; inaddition to PTSC and TPL now also paying for MMP licensing legal fees to Otterson on an hourly basis out of pocket.

Alliasence (and it's Principals) look to be sitting quite pretty, and they have PTSC's BOD's Settlement Agreement to thank for it.

Thats how I see it.