Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy  (Read 12678 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline number6

Re: C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy
« on: March 10, 2012, 05:10:11 AM »
Quote from: dammy;673422
No, they were filing quarterly reports with the SEC, and their stock was on the pink sheet so SEC has some legal authority in this matter.



I'll assume it was meant to be humorous when Leo's response to why CUSA is still paying licensing fees if they were "the new daddy" was:

Quote
No, they were announcements on the possibility of announcements not the actual announcements.


source

#6
 

Offline number6

Re: C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2012, 03:05:26 PM »
@thread

Quote
C=Holdings B.V. v. Asiarim Corporation et al


quite a lot of new documents filed

#6
 

Offline number6

Re: C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy
« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2012, 03:28:02 PM »
@thread

Brief summary, current as of today, posted courtesy Barry Altman:

C=Holdings B.V. v. Asiarim Corporation et al

No sooner was this posted than another new document dated yesterday has been posted:

April 11, 2012

#6
 

Offline number6

Re: C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2012, 04:07:00 PM »
@thread

Once again, not all docs are listed on the website the day they are filed, so we have another new onslaught of docs appearing now.
9 new ones since the last appeared in April, but 1 not available electronically.

source

Enjoy!

#6
 

Offline number6

Re: C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy
« Reply #4 on: April 18, 2013, 05:50:09 PM »
 

Offline number6

Re: C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy
« Reply #5 on: April 18, 2013, 06:50:11 PM »
@TheBilgeRat

I just discovered this most recent lawsuit, so it will take some time to gather any facts.

But logically, something does not add up here to me.

This is, in effect a counter suit directed at one of the parties involved in fighting over the Commodore parent company. If that suit has not been settled, I just wonder why Leadgate S.A. is filing solely against the plaintiff.

The other mystery is the fact that Asiarim based its last gasp chance for revenue on a relationship with CommodoreUSA. Without that relationship, they've got squat.
Why then is more money being poured into this battle and new participants coming to join the fray?

Logic would say a new unnamed player is on the scene or something similar, but that's merely speculation. After all, they've been fighting over nothing for eons. But either way that proves to me that although forum posts from users see little value to branding, the big players still do.

#6
 

Offline number6

Re: C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy
« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2014, 11:32:36 PM »
Quote from: CritAnime;732313
I have posted on AW.net about my views on this. But just so people can see I will post a summery.
 
Leadgate S.A. looks to be a investment consortium. But this might shed light on it. http://uruguaybr.com/2012/06/16/leadgate-turns-in-its-shares-of-flag-air-carrier-pluna-and-leaves-behind-301-5-million-usd-in-debt/
 
Now working for a bank a while back I dealt with collecting debt owed by buisnesses. From my pespective it would appear that regarldess of initial investment been returned there is probably some form of outstanding debt, ?interest ?admin fees, and they are now chasing for it.



Indeed C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy.

Source

#6
 

Offline number6

Re: C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy
« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2014, 04:30:53 PM »
Quote from: number6;756077
Indeed C= Trade Mark Has A New Daddy.

Source

#6



Trademark has passed opposition period and is now registered:

with links

#6