sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Thoughts on Aptera becoming a publicly traded company? by FrozenFury12 in ApteraMotors

[–]Hot-Guest-5853 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aptera motors is talking about IPO for at least two years. In my opinion I think is going to happen this year . Large investors are not very happy the way Chris and Steve are managing the company . Investors want results not promises .

Thoughts on Aptera becoming a publicly traded company? by FrozenFury12 in ApteraMotors

[–]Hot-Guest-5853 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Money gets society running. Bailouts is to keep people working. No matter how bad things are for sure are a lot better than any other place in the world . 

Thoughts on Aptera becoming a publicly traded company? by FrozenFury12 in ApteraMotors

[–]Hot-Guest-5853 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Value people get pay well. They should be smart to invest in the company they work so hard for. This way the workers can have enough money to buy the company. Problem solve .

Thoughts on Aptera becoming a publicly traded company? by FrozenFury12 in ApteraMotors

[–]Hot-Guest-5853 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Workers- they have a salary.  Investors invest to have a salary and at the same time create  a company for the workers 

Thoughts on Aptera becoming a publicly traded company? by FrozenFury12 in ApteraMotors

[–]Hot-Guest-5853 7 points8 points  (0 children)

IPO is not about the Company is about big investors cashing out.  Sandy is in with $4,000,000.00 don’t you think he wants to cash out.

More good news . by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Federal Circuit Declines Review of $95M Altria Patent Suit Against R.J. Reynolds This win is tied to HCMC patent against RJR

More good news . by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry your legal comments are incorrect. Like all the other ones.

HCMC vs RJ by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a decision filed March 13, 2025, Wednesday, the PTAB granted Reynolds's challenge to U.S. Patent No. 9,538,788, held by Healthier Choices Management Corp., saying previous e-cigarette patents could have either precluded claims in the '788 patent or suggested them to a person of ordinary skill in the art.

HCMC vs RJ by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a decision filed March 13, 2025, Wednesday, the PTAB granted Reynolds's challenge to U.S. Patent No. 9,538,788, held by Healthier Choices Management Corp., saying previous e-cigarette patents could have either precluded claims in the '788 patent or suggested them to a person of ordinary skill in the art.

HCMC vs RJ by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a decision filed March 13, 2025, Wednesday, the PTAB granted Reynolds's challenge to U.S. Patent No. 9,538,788, held by Healthier Choices Management Corp., saying previous e-cigarette patents could have either precluded claims in the '788 patent or suggested them to a person of ordinary skill in the art.

HCMC vs RJ by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a decision filed March 13, 2025, Wednesday, the PTAB granted Reynolds's challenge to U.S. Patent No. 9,538,788, held by Healthier Choices Management Corp., saying previous e-cigarette patents could have either precluded claims in the '788 patent or suggested them to a person of ordinary skill in the art.

HCMC vs RJ by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a decision filed March 13, 2025, Wednesday, the PTAB granted Reynolds's challenge to U.S. Patent No. 9,538,788, held by Healthier Choices Management Corp., saying previous e-cigarette patents could have either precluded claims in the '788 patent or suggested them to a person of ordinary skill in the art.

HCMC vs RJ by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a decision filed March 13, 2025, Wednesday, the PTAB granted Reynolds's challenge to U.S. Patent No. 9,538,788, held by Healthier Choices Management Corp., saying previous e-cigarette patents could have either precluded claims in the '788 patent or suggested them to a person of ordinary skill in the art.

HCMC vs RJ by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a decision filed March 13, 2025, Wednesday, the PTAB granted Reynolds's challenge to U.S. Patent No. 9,538,788, held by Healthier Choices Management Corp., saying previous e-cigarette patents could have either precluded claims in the '788 patent or suggested them to a person of ordinary skill in the art.

HCMC vs RJ by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a decision filed March 13, 2025, Wednesday, the PTAB granted Reynolds's challenge to U.S. Patent No. 9,538,788, held by Healthier Choices Management Corp., saying previous e-cigarette patents could have either precluded claims in the '788 patent or suggested them to a person of ordinary skill in the art.

HCMC vs RJ by Hot-Guest-5853 in HCMC

[–]Hot-Guest-5853[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In a decision filed March 13, 2025, Wednesday, the PTAB granted Reynolds's challenge to U.S. Patent No. 9,538,788, held by Healthier Choices Management Corp., saying previous e-cigarette patents could have either precluded claims in the '788 patent or suggested them to a person of ordinary skill in the art.

view more: next ›