Sun, Sep 21, 2014, 6:55 AM EDT - U.S. Markets closed


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Arena Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Message Board

centurycom 867 posts  |  Last Activity: 7 hours ago Member since: Apr 17, 2008
  • "The production of both oil and natural gas is now booming in the United States, but a new 30-year federal forecast sees a falloff in oil after 2020. It expects no slowdown for natural gas.

    U.S. is forecast to see a continued boom in energy production through 2040
    This fracking-led boom will boost exports - and lower imports - of energy
    Energy-related carbon emissions will remain below 2005

    America's energy boom will continue for decades, and natural gas will replace coal as the largest source of U.S. electricity by 2035, the Department of Energy forecast today.

    U.S. production of crude oil will increase through 2016, when it will approach the record set in 1970, before leveling off and then slowly declining after 2020. Natural gas production will grow steadily, jumping 56% from 2012 to 2040, according to an early release of an annual report by DOE's Energy Information Administration.

    "Advanced technologies for crude oil and natural gas production are continuing to increase domestic supply and reshape the U.S. energy economy as well as expand the potential for U.S. natural gas exports," Adam Sieminski, EIA Administrator, said in releasing the Annual Energy Outlook 2014."

  • Reply to


    by celltechsport Sep 15, 2014 4:05 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 15, 2014 5:05 PM Flag

    Between the lines, both parties agreed to a motion to dismiss with prejudice. That means it is over and done and that term is used in settlement agreements so the claims cannot be revisited. It means the loser is crying uncle, but let's make sure you don't hurt me again. Here is my lunch money.

  • Reply to

    Who stands behind Spherix

    by cravi109 Sep 12, 2014 5:41 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 15, 2014 10:51 AM Flag

    Did a search Alexander Poltorak leaves Spherix got no results only results are joins Spherix and as of 03/31/2014 was still there:
    "New grant $173,011 (Spherix Incorporated)04/03/2014

    To see additional events for Alexander I. Poltorak, sign up now for FREE!

    Alexander I. Poltorak's Biography
    Mr. Alexander Poltorak, a Board member since October 2013, has been the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of General Patent Corp., an intellectual property management firm focusing on IP strategy and valuation, patent licensing, enforcement and brokerage since 1989 and the Managing Director of IP Holdings LLC, an affiliate of General Patent Corp, since 2000. Prior to founding General Patent Corp., Mr. Poltorak served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of Rapitech Systems, Inc., a publicly-traded computer technology company, was an Assistant Professor of Physics at Touro College and Assistant Professor of Biomathematics at Cornel ...
    (Read More)
    Source: Spherix Incorporated on 03/31/2014"

  • centurycom centurycom Sep 15, 2014 7:49 AM Flag

    Spherix was the defendant in that case so when they say the plaintiff was dismissed without prejudice it means that Spherix claims have significance and Spherix's accusations are still valid and the case can precede.
    These must have been standard and essential patents because it seems the judge is asking that Spherix first negotiate a fair and reasonable rate before bringing the case for trial if the other party were to refuse

    In the AT&T case they dismissed Spherix claims as the plaintiff with prejudice, but while also announcing a settlement had been reached by the parties. As part of the settlement AT&T would not want Spherix to enter any further claims for those patents in the case and once they came to an agreement they both recommended to the Judge that the case be closed and Spherix could never pursue any further claims against AT&T on the patent, or patents in question.

    With and without prejudice though it sounds simple can mean different things regarding a plaintiff, or defendant, a settlement, or a motion with different combinations of each. It would seem that there could exist a much clearer manner to announce results, but then we wouldn't need lawyers if the wording in law were simple to understand.

  • Reply to

    AT&T Settlement

    by centurycom Sep 13, 2014 1:52 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 14, 2014 7:12 PM Flag

    One other thought on this. Think of it this way: Spherix's motion is with prejudice. The case never went to court so the judge could not make a ruling against Spherix could he? No, he could not. That statement "" with prejudice "is very significant because it was made by the judge on the recommendation of the parties. It was not a ruling by the judge because the case had not gone before him yet. He hadn't the time to view all the evidence so he could not have made that determination. With prejudice ends the case, and it has ended with a settlement because I am certain Spherix would not have ended it without going to trial, if they did, why should they have even bothered in the first place.

  • Reply to

    AT&T Settlement

    by centurycom Sep 13, 2014 1:52 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 14, 2014 6:52 PM Flag

    Another seemly insignificant false statement, but really quite significant when you examine it:

    "Both the claim and counter claim were ordered dismissed without prejudice by Judge Ed Kinkeade on Aug. 13. "

    That statement is not true because Spherix motion was ordered with prejudice. Which means that they cannot re-open their claims against AT&T because if AT&T settled, which they did, they certainly wouldn't want to allow Spherix to sue them again. No one would make a settlement with a company without having that be the end of it by mutual agreement. With prejudice ends the case and is ALWAYS included when there is a settlement. Spherix would not have agreed to a with prejudice motion unless they received a substantial settlement. Case closed, give me my money because it's a done deal.

  • Reply to

    sanctions on russia

    by munson69ken Sep 13, 2014 7:55 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 14, 2014 6:31 PM Flag

    Let's try this again,

    Winter is on it's way to Europe. Would certainly be a cold one without all of that natural gas the Russian provide. So, how many people here really think the Europeans want all that gas shut off for sanctions? If I were them and I wanted to place sanctions against the Russians I would sanction everything but the oil and gas segment leaving the Russians starved for revenues in all segments but the ones important to me. All the infrastructure is in place for Europe to receive Natural Gas from Russia, but perhaps not from other sources. So, whether they like it or not, Europe is stuck right now and must get its gas from Russia. They spent a lot of money extending those pipe lines from Russia and it is not easy, or timely in sending them somewhere else. The U.S. Is not prepared, at this point in time, to export to Europe. Where are the tankers to ship LNG to Europe? It takes money and time to rearrange imports. The Russian need the revenue for Gas because of the sanctions and the Europeans need the Gas, so they are both stuck with each other and Cappy is Happy, Pappy.

  • Reply to

    sanctions on russia

    by munson69ken Sep 13, 2014 7:55 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 14, 2014 10:26 AM Flag

    I don't blame you for not having the gonads to use your handle Fatzman since you were proved a complete idiot with the same garbage then.

  • Reply to

    Immutable Truth:

    by hickshelly396 Sep 13, 2014 3:15 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 13, 2014 4:54 PM Flag

    "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."

  • centurycom centurycom Sep 13, 2014 3:01 PM Flag

    Now add approximately 30% to those figures for all the flared gas. As energy production from gas increases it will add even more incentive for drillers to capture 100% of the gas at the wells. The need for pipe lines to new well sights such as the N. Dakota region is the main reason for all the waste. The new regulations imposed by N. Dakota will greatly alleviate the issue of waste. Penalties mean lost money and money is part of the cause and also part of solution to flaring. Money makes things happen. Drilling, transportation of fuel, and the market for production of energy all have to coincide to create the market to make money for everyone. Companies such as Capstone will be part of the equation, promoted and incentivized since all segments need to work in unison to make even more money for each other. One hand feeds the other so to speak.

  • Reply to

    AT&T Settlement

    by centurycom Sep 13, 2014 1:52 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 13, 2014 2:26 PM Flag

    Some people are not too bright and they sell with no information available because they don't have the ability to reason. Non- disclosure means non- disclosure, and that means nobody knows. So, why are they selling? Because they can't reason. Plain and simple as that.

  • centurycom by centurycom Sep 13, 2014 1:52 PM Flag

    If there was information available at the time of this settlement that Spherix didn't have a case it would not have taken as long to come to terms for the settlement. It took from 6/20/14, the initial announcement, to 08/07/2014 to announce a settlement had been reached. Therefore, it is logical to conclude that if it takes 2 months to hammer out the details it should be fair, but substantial. How long would it have taken to say, " Spheriix you don't have a case" Ipso Facto

  • Reply to

    updated language in the previous analyst note

    by davidjames1901 Sep 13, 2014 10:15 AM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 13, 2014 1:18 PM Flag

    If there was information available at the time of this settlement that Spherix didn't have a case it would not have taken as long to come to terms in the settlement. It took from 6/20/14 the initial announcement, to 08/07/2014 to announce a settlement had been reached. Therefore, it is logical to concluded that if it takes 2 months to hammer out the details it should be fair, but substantial. Ipso Facto.

  • It just stands to reason. They are not getting it out of the ground for the fun of it. The trend is our friend.

    "The EIA also noted that natural gas production continues to grow strongly, keeping prices moderate despite growing demand. U.S. natural gas production is expected to increase 5.3% in 2014, with the output increases are supporting strong gas injections into storage and record exports to Mexico.

    Meanwhile, a recent report from Bentek noted that August marked the eighth straight month in which U.S. gas production set a new record. Average August 2014 gas production was 3.9 Bcf/d, or 6%, higher than August 2013, the report said.

    —Thomas W. Overton, JD is a POWER associate editor."

  • Reply to

    Cpst losers 2014

    by mollygalore Sep 12, 2014 7:48 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 13, 2014 9:59 AM Flag

    Molly, Molly,

    Capstone hedge fund shorts are leaving you retail shorts as bag holders . For the past 10 weeks the short position has decreased while for the past 6 months institutional investment has increased. The numbers just don't support your claims, and as a matter of fact are just the opposite of what you say. Just because you would like to believe that so strongly doesn't make it so. You should cover before you become a victim of your beliefs.

  • Reply to

    watch out for the teens

    by trollhater72 Sep 12, 2014 12:20 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 13, 2014 9:43 AM Flag

    $13 dollars is not a drop.

  • Reply to

    How not to lose money with cpst

    by polar.vortex Aug 16, 2014 4:41 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 12, 2014 2:29 PM Flag

    They haven't had the same management for 18 years. Dah!

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

  • Reply to

    Frand licensing spherix

    by cravi109 Sep 12, 2014 8:06 AM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 12, 2014 10:32 AM Flag

    Not certain how far in the rears Spherix can go for past infringement, usually it is from the time a company is notified that it is infringing ( I believe ) , but this case has an unusual twist to it in that a lot of these opposing companies bid on these patents. So, it would seem that if the court recognized that as knowledge of the patent then perhaps the past infringement could go back to that point in time. Another point, even though Nortel did not litigate these patents, there is no reason to believe that they didn't notify infringers that they were infringing. If that could be proved then the past infringement could be huge. Possibly the inventors who work for Rockstar would have knowledge of that. This will be very interesting to see how it all plays out. It could very well leaf to very substantial dividends to investors in Spherix. AJMO.

  • Reply to

    The Inventors work for Rockstar / SPEX

    by swihart_art Sep 12, 2014 9:36 AM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 12, 2014 10:09 AM Flag

    These inventions will be scrutinized to the very smallest, minute detail by the opposition to state that their product is different and therefore doesn't not infringe. Fore instance, if a microchip's (if it's method of operation were being litigated) clocking searched from right to left, if the inventor didn't state that it made no difference, then the opposition could argue that their product search in the opposite direction and that particular claim should be eliminated. These litigations go to the smallest detail and that is why the Judge, who also is an engineer, is used instead of a jury in the Markman hearing. It is also why these trials are so expensive to litigate. I believe that is why the defendants are going by way of the inter review process before it decides to settle, or not. It would seem not to be such an expensive process, and they can throw some cheap stuff on the wall and see if it sticks. AJMO. Value it as much as you paid for it.

  • Reply to

    Latest court documents Vtech Uniden

    by fugitive6129 Sep 10, 2014 3:39 PM
    centurycom centurycom Sep 12, 2014 9:28 AM Flag

    I believe it is conducted by a panel from the patent office to review claims of the existence of prior art before a patent was granted and issued. I find it hard to believe in Spherix case, since these patents are essential standard patents that they wouldn't have had to pass much scrutiny in the past. These patents were industry standard patents and recognized as such, so I find it hard to believe if anyone knew of prior art that the issue would have come up before now. I am no lawyer, and you should value my opinion by how much you paid for it. AJMO.

4.16-0.11(-2.58%)Sep 19 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.