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

no its only the medical side , as far as i can see.

"In a 100 per cent victory in a dispute with Stanelco Fibre Optics Limited,
BioProgress Technology Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of BioProgress plc
(LSE: AIM: BPRG), has been awarded outright ownership of the master patent that
gives it exclusive worldwide rights to the process of making capsules from non-
gelatin materials by means of radio frequency ('RF')."

my reading is that "capsules" are tablets , not packaging.

Bosley,

From what I have read, SEO have moved onto other things so largely the verdict is perhaps irrelevant in the longer term. In the short term the SP is getting / going to get hammered, picking the bottom will have good rewards IMHO. Unfortunatley this will still hang around for a while as the matter of compensation is still to be settled.

All IMHO of course.

regards

PTH

i dont think compensation will be too much apart from costs as i dont think seo were making any money from capsule technology. thinking about it , they could still use the technology but pay bprg a license fee.

nice to be right. not as bad as we all thought . so happy i jumped back , and also jumped in today. here is seo,s response.

Stanelco plc

High Court rules Stanelco entitled to 2 patent families


Stanelco Fibre Optics Limited ('SFOL'), a subsidiary of Stanelco plc, and
BioProgress Technology Limited ('BioProgress') had a brief period of interaction
during 1998. Five years after the interaction ended BioProgress sent SFOL a
letter before action claiming that it was entitled to three families of patents
owned by SFOL relating to the formation of capsules and also that SFOL had
breached confidence. During October 2003 SFOL initiated High Court proceedings
against BioProgress and the case was heard in the High Court in July of this
year.


The outcome of the litigation has been that SFOL has succeeded in confirming
that it is solely entitled to two of the three patent families (including SFOL's
patent family for making capsules using a rotary die process which is the most
commercially significant application for capsule manufacture) and jointly
entitled to two of the claims of the other patent family. The remaining claims
of this patent family have been found to belong to BioProgress. The Court has
also found in BioProgress' favour in relation to part of its claim for breach of
confidence by virtue of SFOL's use of certain information as the basis for its
patent applications.


Commenting on the court's decision, Stanelco Chief Executive Ian Balchin said
'We are obviously pleased to have won outright on our entitlement to two of the
three patents families. We disagree with the court's reasoning in relation to
the remaining issues. However, we believe that we have good prospects of
appealing the court's decision and this is the course we will be following.
Stanelco's business has continued to develop since the action was brought, with
a number of new applications for our RF technology - which do not rely upon
these patents. These include food tray lidding, which now represents a very
significant part of Stanelco's future projected revenues.'



A full copy of the Judgment will be available in due course from the Court's
website at
http://www.courtservice.gov.uk/judgments/judg_home.htm

Wouldn't believe all you read just yet...

i agree. maybe bprgs victory isnt all it seems adie

Lol, I mean the other way CEO of SEO is making sweeping statement, the master patent has been awarded to BPRG not SEO so any associated patents would be under the control of BPRG not SEO. We will have to wait and see I am a holder of BPRG but considering jumping into SEO also, will wait and see first.

Until we know the impact of the damages its difficult to know what to do. I woulod think SEO would want to move this to a rapid conclusion. I baled out yesterday but will be back in when I know the extent of the damage

to be honest adie , i'm not arsed. as far as i am concerned this isnt what seo is about . the packageing side is what got me interested . anything else is a bonus. it looks like this side of seo is safe .and that is good news to me.

Fair do I may join once the full details have been released regarding compensation etc etc, Good luck to all holders anyway.

cheers adie. dont leave it too late

I certainly would consider an investment in SEO a very risky proposition, the management in my opinion are to say the least totally incompetent and should resign after this debacle . I most certainly would not risk one penny of my money in this company until the management or at least the CEO decide to do just that.

Bosley,
BPRG thread has comment from Citywire advising stay clear of Stanelco, can't see how this affecte the packaging patents though. I hope they don't appeal and just draw a line under it and move on.
What do you think?
Interesting that after a nose-dive some people were buying in, don't know aht to do right now, stay put, buy more or bale at next best opportunity?

The risk here I think is not whether the packaging side is unaffected but whether the company can stand the cost of any damages that might be awarded for its breach of confidence in 1998. That has led to SEO obtaining a major contract with a giant company, RP Scherer/Cardinal (creating the Ingel JV), business acquired with BPRG's ideas, now ruled in law to have belonged to them and not SEO. In summary, does SEO have the assets? No wonder they say they will appeal, but is it a fruitless exercise? SEO will have to pay the costs of appeal to start with.

I have read that the main beef (no pun intended) of the BPRG board is that when SEO used the ideas gained under a confidentiality agreement, BPRG was strapped for cash and looked close to going under. It is speculated on BPRG discussion boards that SEO were hoping they would disappear and have a clear run. Certainly it is not out of character judging by the outrageous Isracaps RNS and now this "victory" RNS issued today.

hello andysmith. just read the bprg thread and the citywire release.its all getting a bit confusing . like you , i hope a line can be drawn under it and seo can move on . i also dont think bprg will want an appeal as they are going to be busy with the usa tour.so maybe its just a bit of sabre rattling by seo
to get a better deal out of the outcome.but i really think they should concentrate on the packaging side of things . such a bright future if they do .
there is also another way out and thats a take over.but thats just a little fantasy......

I do agree seo could have issued a more inteligent/understandable response to the judgement...how about more details Mr Balchin?

I think Balchin has some explaining to do BUT then get on with the huge propect in packaging. At least SEO does have cash and no debt so a short term shortfall if funding can be arranged should not be a problem with the prospects around the corner. After rewarding himself with loads of shares, aabout time the shareholders got some rewards. Still think medium term potential for 50-100 pence?

andysmith - the medium term potential that you are suggesting of 50-100p equates to a market cap of 400m-800m - even before the dilution that another fund raising will ensure. Seems a tad optimistic to me. I also thought that SEO haad less than 1m cash at present.

I still think the fundamental issue at post 93 could affect the company's ability to finance the "other businesses". Clearly it hasn't worried you guys!

Staying out for now, some excellent post on BPRG on iii (retired barrister)it certainly does not look good for SEO the major patent given to BPRG the rest hang off this so if SEO wanted to do anything with these they would then need permission off BPRG. Compensation could cripple SEO, think i'll buy some more BPRG...