From p65 Fogleman Deposition:
Q. Is it your understanding that the IP that is
11 the subject of the license agreement has some value?
12 MR. LOMAX: Objection to the form of the
13 question.
14 THE WITNESS: Based on the results of the
15 efforts to replicate the IP, we haven't been able to
16 determine an answer to that question. I think that
17 is the issue.
18 BY MR. CHAIKEN:
19 Q. So, sitting here today, IPH doesn't know
20 whether it has any value, if any. Would you agree with
21 that?
22 A. So far we have not been able to prove that
23 there is any value in the intellectual property in the
24 license agreement.
This statement, p65 Fogleman deposition, taken on oath, knocks on the head the Planet Rossi meme that IH has discovered value in the Rossi IP...
Otherwise the IPH deposition is a stunning waste of time, with Rossi's guy on a fishing expedition in waters guaranteed to be devoid of fish. It is quite clear that IPH is a holding company with no life of its own, and therefore no answers other than the one from IH. This fishing from Rossi waste's time and money (lawyers to do the preparation, be present at the hearing, cost of the hearing), and annoys everyone. Similarly the IH deposition when there is nothing you will get from corporate questioning you do not get from questioning the principals.
IHFB says this is slimy - I'm inclined to agree - but Rossi will want to be nasty to TD et al anyway he can and this unproductive annoyance is the only tool he has.
Regards, THH