for more information about stanelco click on the links.

driver's research page link
http://www.moneyam.com/InvestorsRoom/posts.php?tid=7681#lastread
website link
http://www.stanelco.co.uk/index.htm

There will be a brief hearing tomorrow with BPRG/SEO and Lord Justice Jacob. scheduled for 9:30am.
It is my understanding that Judge Jacob has sought permission to deal with the case alone.
I dont know what the briefing is about but at least we wont have long to wait to find out.

Had a look at that Jimward, but couldn't find anything very up to date. Just a mention of the hearing of 16th. Jan, which is less up to date than we already are.

Have I missed something?

Love the Blinger/Seq bashing - keeps the thread alive whilst there is no SEO news. If he wasn't here you'd have to invent him. What a plonker.

jimward, sounds like he wants to bang a few heads. he's probably as sick of this as the rest of us!!

oblomov
look at Library section (weekly comments)

Thanks Jim - got it.

Large buyer still out there?

COURT 74
Before LORD JUSTICE JACOB
Thursday, 9th February, 2006
At 9:45

For Mention
APPLICATIONS
A3/2005/0819(A) Stanelco RF Technologies Ltd -v- Bioprogress Technology Ltd. Application of Claimant for a stay of proceedings and directions..
A3/2005/0823(B) Stanelco RF Technologies Ltd -v- Bioprogress Technology Ltd. Application of Claimant for a stay of proceedings and directions.
A3/2005/0824(A) Stanelco RF Technologies Ltd -v- Bioprogress Technology Ltd. Application of Claimant for a stay of proceedings and directions..
APPEALS
From The Chancery Division
Patents Court
FINAL DECISIONS
A3/2005/0823 Stanelco RF Technologies Ltd v Bioprogress Technology Ltd. Appeal of Claimant from the order of Mr Christopher Floyd QC, dated 2nd November 2004, filed 15th April 2005.
A3/2005/0824 Stanelco RF Technologies Ltd v Bioprogress Technology Ltd. Appeal of Claimant from the order of Mr Christopher Floyd QC, dated 9th December 2004, filed 15th April 2005.
A3/2005/0819 Stanelco RF Technologies Ltd v Bioprogress Technology Ltd. Appeal of Defendant from the order of Mr Christopher Floyd QC, dated 2nd November 2004, filed 15th April 2005.

Don't know which way it's going to go!!

My moneys on an out of court job for the judge to rubber stamp and both sides claim victory.
One to say we won and have been vindicated and the other to say we can now move on and concentrate on our core developments.
Alan

I hope so Alan, I've got all my little bits 'n pieces crossed!
Kim

In case anyones interested below is the DEFRA landfill legislation of UK with targets. This is reviewed in 2007... Implications are obvious.

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/localauth/lats/legislation.htm

Case Over settlement atlast

Stanelco PLC
09 February 2006


9th January 2006


STANELCO PLC ('STANELCO')

STANELCO AND BIOPROGRESS SETTLE PATENT DISPUTE

Stanelco plc, the radio frequency applications group, and BioProgress plc, are
pleased to announce that they have reached a settlement of the legal dispute
between two of their subsidiaries.

Stanelco RF Technologies Limited and BioProgress Technology Limited were
disputing entitlement to three families of patents relating to the making of
water-soluble capsules sealed using radio frequency.

Under the main terms of settlement, both parties will be able to commercially
exploit all three patent families. Stanelco plc have agreed to issue to
BioProgress new ordinary 0.1p shares and or cash up to a maximum market value of
1,000,000.

Commenting on the settlement, Ian Balchin, Executive Vice Chairman, Stanelco
plc, said: 'We are pleased to have resolved this long running dispute with
BioProgress. This is a pragmatic solution for both parties and enables us to
concentrate on our respective businesses'.

I dont know about anyone else - but I call that a good result for both parties....win win

common sense , baza. now hopefully we can move on.

Morning chaps.
Line drawn.
Told ya so Kim. ;-)
Alan

Very interesting - there were one or two well informed people on the BPRG thread las t night elsewhwre predicting just such a result

Ahem. I refer my Right honourable friend to the reply I gave the house yesterday (post 14587)

This looks good for both companies, as they can now put this behind them. As a SEO holder I am very pleased with the outcome as it was at the lower end of the scale that I thought SEO would have to pay. Good luck to both companies.

Bet we dont hear much today from Blinger!

Good.