Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Nuvo Research Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cal Gary who wrote (8618)	2/2/2002 11:45:38 PM
From: Cal Gary	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14101

Hi Di7026 New twist, eh! Thanks muchly for posting the Pennsaid Canadian Trademark info. Me thinks that Pharmacia and Up-John are married. They might be married to Monsanto, too. I do wonder why Pharmacia would object <g> Perhaps to Celebr(ex)ate by putting a wrench into Pennsaid's progress. I do not have a link, but in the distant past, I have read a poster on another thread -US stock- claiming to be a former (retired??) pharma exec or marketer, saying the games being played by pharma competitors were dirty serious, ruthless and very nasty (liken to mafia style). In other words, somewhat meaner than what's happening on SH when the shorters, doubters and bashers come out of the wood works. <g> I suppose when many Billions are at stake, these games takes extremes. Notice "FILED: 2001-11-19 FORMALIZED: 2001-12-04 " Done in less than 1 month. Wow. I suspect this trademark change is to align with the US trademark just approved and probably with the UK. Would a change at this time to the trademark colors, negatively affect our Canadian application given the fickled nature of Health Canada regarding changes? Or is this a part of the labeling process and DMX has a window to make changes? Maybe HC is getting closer after all. Lifted the following Canadian Trademark from Di7026. ========================================================== "There are 2 trademark files on Pennsaid in the Canadian data base. One was filed in 1996 and registered in 1998. Note that there was actually opposition from Phamacia and Upjohn but then later withdrawn. The more recent filing was in Nov 2001 and it was formalized in Dec. Don't know why DMX filed another application. Perhaps they want to expand what this trademark encompasses (note the section on COLOR CLAIM). CANADIAN TRADE-MARK DATA * Note : Data on trade-marks is shown in the official language in which it was submitted. The database was last updated on: 2002-01-29 APPLICATION NUMBER: 1122577 STATUS: FORMALIZED FILED: 2001-11-19 FORMALIZED: 2001-12-04 REGISTRANT: DIMETHAID RESEARCH INC. 1405 Denison Street Markham, L3R 5V2 ONTARIO AGENT: OGILVY RENAULT SUITE 1100 1981 MCGILL COLLEGE AVENUE MONTREAL QUEBEC H3A 3C1 REPRESENTATIVE FOR SERVICE: OGILVY RENAULT SUITE 1100 1981 MCGILL COLLEGE AVENUE MONTREAL QUEBEC H3A 3C1 TRADE-MARK: <> MARK DESCRIPTIVE REFERENCE: PENNSAID DESIGN COLOUR CLAIM: Colour is claimed as a feature of the trade-mark. The letters PEN are blue. The letters NSAID, the words "topical solutions" and the line are dark purple. The light portions of the droplet are blue, the dark portions of the droplet are purple. WARES: (1) Pharmaceuticals, namely, a topical prescription non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. CLAIMS: Proposed Use in CANADA. ACTION DATE BF COMMENTS Filed 19 November 2001 Created 23 November 2001 Formalized 04 December 2001 CANADIAN TRADE-MARK DATA * Note : Data on trade-marks is shown in the official language in which it was submitted. The database was last updated on: 2002-01-29 APPLICATION NUMBER: 0804021 REGISTRATION NUMBER: TMA504587 STATUS: REGISTERED FILED: 1996-02-09 FORMALIZED: 1996-02-22 ADVERTISED: 1996-07-31 REGISTERED: 1998-11-25 REGISTRANT: DIMETHAID RESEARCH INC., 1405 DENISON STREET MARKHAM, L3R 5V2 ONTARIO REPRESENTATIVE FOR SERVICE: SWABEY OGILVY RENAULT 1981 MCGILL COLLEGE AVENUE SUITE 1600 MONTREAL QUEBEC H3A 2Y3 INTERESTED PARTIES OPPONENT PHARMACIA & UPJOHN COMPANY 7000 PORTAGE ROAD KALAMAZOO, MICHIGAN, 49001 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA REPRESENTATIVE FOR SERVICE: RICHES, MCKENZIE & HERBERT LLP SUITE 1800 2 BLOOR STREET EAST TORONTO ONTARIO M4W 3J5 TRADE-MARK: PENNSAID WARES: (1) Pharmaceuticals, namely, a topical prescription non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. CLAIMS: Declaration of Use filed October 15, 1998. ACTION DATE BF COMMENTS Filed 09 February 1996 Created 16 February 1996 Formalized 22 February 1996 Search recorded 16 April 1996 Approved 25 June 1996 Translation requested 29 June 1996 Translation received 29 June 1996 Advertised 31 July 1996 Vol.43 Issue 2179 Opposition 09 October 1996 Opposition removed 23 September 1998 23 September 1998 Case Closed - Opponent Withdraws Allowed 24 September 1998 Allowance notice sent 24 September 1998 24 March 1999 Amendment to registration 19 November 1998 Owner Address Change Registered 25 November 1998 Rep for service changed 29 November 2000 From: 4497 To: 5667 "

To: Cal Gary who wrote (8618)	2/3/2002 1:09:54 PM
From: Joe Krupa	Respond to of 14101

Cal, "From another point of view, "they" maybe trying to figure out what the strength of demand and adjusting real time" This one's hard to figure. My best guess is along the lines of your thoughts the other day re: the price dipping below the minimum set price for this draw. It's possible we are hovering around that price, likely in the $5.00 area. It could be that Acqua shorted too many shares in the days above $5.00, and when we dipped below that level (and the days no longer counted), Acqua had to cover some of those shorts on the open market instead of through shares they would be getting from Dimethaid. With the price leaning back and forth across that line, Acqua likely has to do some complicated math every day trying to figure out if it will wind up a draw day by the close, or not. When the price is very close to the limit, it probably would work in the favour of Acqua to short anyway. This way, if the price winds up above the minimum set, then they have made the right call and shorted the shares appropriately. If the price dips below the minimum at the close, after they have shorted all day long, then they just have to cover on the open market the next day. This latter scenario is almost a no-lose for them also since they get to cover on the open market at a price lower then where they shorted - the lower price being a given because that's the reason they had to resort to covering on the open market in the first place. I hope this makes sense because it's hard to explain. You are right though, this draw can in fact be termed "chucked out the window." I'm roughly guessing $1-1.5 million, a week this Monday. joe