Bioprogress is a stock I have been in and out of quite a few times since it floated in May but not much mention here on the Investors' Room. Does anyone else follow this stock. I see it is up 1.5p today and a few good buyers seem to have appeared.

;-)

http://www.moneyam.com/action/news/showArticle?id=497256

It just gets messier and messier.

As far as I read it, both will eventually pay some costs so they're both down on it.

Big Al, that afx is confused.. if you read both RNS carefully it is a different picture to that

3 November 2004



Stanelco plc

Clarification of Patent Entitlement Case

Stanelco finds it necessary to clarify certain information contained
within one
of BioProgress' press releases in connection with the litigation
between the two
companies.


Stanelco wishes to clarify that the Court has not ordered that
Stanelco has to
pay damages to BioProgress. No final Order will be made until Stanelco's
application to admit further evidence, which may result in a
reconsideration of
certain of the Judge's findings, has been determined. All the Court has
determined to date are the principles of a mechanism through which any
damages
will be assessed, if a final Order for damages is ultimately made.


It is Stanelco's firm position that no damages, or at worst, minimal
damages,
will ultimately be found to be payable to BioProgress.


BioProgress PLC
03 November 2004


Press Release 3 November 2004


BioProgress plc

("BioProgress" or "the Company")

Further success for BioProgress in patent entitlement case


BioProgress plc (AIM: BPRG; NASDAQ: BPRG) announces that in a hearing
yesterday
in the dispute between BioProgress Technology Limited and Stanelco
Fibre Optics
Limited ("Stanelco"), the UK Patents Court made further rulings
following the
previous judgment handed down on 1 October 2004.


The Court made various declarations about which company had invented
the process
of sealing water-soluble polymeric materials by radio frequency ("RF")
welding
in order to form capsules. These declarations made reference to
BioProgress'
sole entitlement to the main claim and all except three subsidiary
claims in the
Master Patent. The Court also clarified that BioProgress' entitlement
to the
main patent claims in the Master Patent conferred no right upon
Stanelco to use
any of the subsidiary processes without the permission of BioProgress.


In its earlier judgment, the Court had held that Stanelco had misused
Bioprogress' confidential information by making the patent filings
which founded
the three families of patents. Yesterday, the Court made an Order for
the
commencement of the procedure for assessing the amount to be paid in
damages by
Stanelco to BioProgress for breach of confidence.


Stanelco was ordered to disclose details of its foreign patent
applications, so
that ownership of all patents and patent applications in the Master
Patent
family can be dealt with at a further, final hearing in approximately
4-6 weeks
time.


The Court also made an order for costs in favour of BioProgress.
Stanelco must
make an interim payment towards these costs of approximately
GBP180,000 within two
weeks.


At the end of the hearing, Stanelco indicated that it had commenced an
application to request the Court to reconsider certain aspects of the
previous
judgment. Stanelco was ordered to file its evidence within seven days.


Graham Hind, Chief Executive of BioProgress said: "We are very pleased
that the
Court has confirmed our entitlement to the main patent claims in the
Master
Patent and has awarded us interim costs. The Court has made clear
directives to
Stanelco as to the course of action it must now take. We remain as
comfortable
as we have always been with our position, and will be making no
further comment
until the next hearing is concluded."


- Ends -

They've banned me from their thread on ADVFN free bb.

Tw*ts :-)

G - I always read these things too quick and I ain't the best interpreter at times. ;-)

Dil - surprised you lasted so long m8! LOL

Me too :-)

What the hell is going on, someone must get reported to the FSA for this total and utter bollo..s. You can't just put these RNS's out without any substance, can anyone who was at the case throw some light on this. We shareholders cannot be treated like this...

AdieH: BPRG have a very strong legal case, indeed they have won the argument. However the defending companies lawyers are using all available legal means to change the outcome. This is a natural process. The Judge has given them time to come back to CC with a fully detailed challenge concerning overseas patents. These things take time but we are in the closing stretch and it will, IMO, all be over before XMAS and the judgement will all be BPRG's favour.

Be patient on this as it does sound confusing, and of course to shareholders hoping for a quick and clinical outcome it is very frustrating, but it will all end soon.

So I suggest you follow the BPRG RNS posting. You can of course complain to the FSA but by the time they get around to investigating it will be all over...or I have got this completely wrong!!

Thanks, I hold on for big profits in the future, I hope, but it seems to be me that SEO are clutching at straws and there shareholders should be asking questions of their board... Thought about investing in SEO once case over with but this has certainly made me very wary...

AdieH

IMO, as a long term investor, you should be concentrating on the fundamentals going forward and not some piss-arse case, the shenanigans of which should be of no concern. At the end of the day it will not impact massively on what happens 2,3,4,5 years hence, which I assume is your ultimate goal. I really can't see what you're getting all hot and bothered about. I thought all the nutters were on ADVFN!!

Chill out and watch your investment grow, if it can and if it does.

Al
;-)

Big Al - I know Bio have played it down but this case potentially has a large effect going forward as it concerns the Swallo technology which Wyeth are interested in. Ingel (the Stanelco JV with Cardinal Health) is directly affected. Wyeth is Cardinal's biggest customer and Ingel is/was in competition with BPRG potentially.

Can anyone give me a reason for the SEO RNS, the purpose of which:

"Stanelco finds it necessary to clarify certain information contained
within one
of BioProgress' press releases in connection with the litigation
between the two
companies.
Stanelco wishes to clarify that the Court has not ordered that
Stanelco has to
pay damages to BioProgress."



i.e., where did BPRG state that BRPG had mentioned the payment of damages? They are yet to be resolved, it is the interim costs and some of them have to be paid within 14 days!

Bones , its a side show that traders will feed on. As Al says , has little relevance on long term prospects.

GBP xxxx settlement for or against is irrelevant for "a FTSE100 Company Of The Future"...... yeah right :-)

We need to have a chat sometime to clear the air Bones , I'm not a deramper I invest on fundamentals but these have no track record or alternitivley I trade on chart signals (these are a neutral at best).

Jumpin , who cares ?

Its a shit or bust company thats future has sod all to do with "the case" as shown by todays share price action.

As you all know .... I aint convinced and until the eps justifies the share price its a dreamers/rampers/derampers/ delight.

GOOD LUCK.

Jumping, the word desperation springs to mind

Morning all,just entered this one ,,is there something about a case ,,joke..

Dil - I disagree. The outcome of the dispute with Stanelco has plenty of impact on the long term prospects. It's not the only prospect but as it impacts on potentially the biggest customer to date, it is relevant and definitely not a sideshow.

I know what you say about traders and short term psychology but that is not of concern to me. The price can do what it likes, I am not concerned. The business being put into place will create the sought after fundamentals. Whether you can pick up the shares at Dave's 1 by then I somehow doubt, but nothing in this world is a certainty.

Note AFX been corrected!


(Correcting this item from yesterday to show BioProgress never claimed that
Stanelco had been ordered to pay damages, but rather at this point only costs)
LONDON (AFX) - Stanelco PLC said the UK Patents Court has not ordered it to
pay damages to BioProgress PLC in a dispute over patent applications.
BioProgress earlier said that the court had made an order for Stanelco to
pay costs to it, and must make an interim payment towards these costs of about
180,000 stg within two weeks.
However, Stanelco said later that the court will not make a final order
until the company's application to admit further evidence, which may result in a
reconsideration of some of the judge's findings, has been determined.
The company added that it believes that no damages, or at worst minimal
damages, will ultimately be found to be payable to Bioprogress.
cml/bam/cw
For more information and to contact AFX: www.afxnews.com and
www.afxpress.com

Bones - think you misunderstand me.

I meant to say, the award of costs or damamges is pretty irrelevant. I know the fact that they effectively keep all the revenue, etc from the technology is a big plus once it gets going.

Sorry for the confusion, but I just get a bit fed up when people who are supposedly long term investors get upset about daily, weekly or even monthly situations. They should be looking at years ahead with an outfit such as BPRG. That's when the "jam" may arrive.

More from the other place

schull69 - 4 Nov'04 - 10:52 - 3120 of 3152

A bit more from the cc on Tuesday.I'm not a lawyer so wont be able to comment on detail but this might add to the current talk about damages.The issue came up in court after 4.30 when the time had overrun and the Judge had asked the usher if he could carry on which was granted.Floyd said that 'the usual order for breach of confidence, should be made either by enquiry or by accounts.'This is when our man Baldwin stepped in making it clear that he requires the enquiry to extend to all 3 patents,that he requires disclosure and not an interptetation of them,'..we want to know sums so that we can make an informed election.'This was ordered to be made within 28 days as I posted and I remind you that Baldwin was insistant on the wording 'sufficient to show.'My impression is that he cant wait to get his hands on the figures and then send SEO down the Swanee, never to be seen again...and BPRG wont be on the bankside with a life raft'Remember also that Baldwin is the top patent lawyer in the country....it's a real pleasure to see this terrier at work....this is real court room drama.

Another point:the Judge said in court that costs take into account'..the conduct of the parties in court.'If their rns is in contempt of court then I think Floyd should be informed of this..he wont take kindly to it.