I've seen this in the other board TheBigPicture
Post# of 1559

Quote:
TheBigPicture
Monday, 03/28/16 02:52:46 PM
Re: againstallodds post# 26025
Post # of 26035
Thanks for your response. I wanted to know a timeline before I posted the smoking gun to confirm there is NO PATENT. According to the information Gregg provided in the following email the USPTO should now be returning results in the search if in fact he filed. It has been over a year since he claims he filed.
I had this email exchange with Gregg on 4/1/15...See below
4/1/15
xxxxxxxx,
I've always appreciated your interest in the company however I certainly not advice anyone to invest in any company without feeling 100% secure with their decision. I believe we have discussed this before. Rest assured that a patent application has been filed with the USPTO. I would be a complete fool not to do so. Our first attorney, Ben King (www.yeeiplaw.com/benking.html) performed the patentability search and filed our first provisional patent however this only protected us in the United States. Our second attorney, Charles Mihro (www.patentnavigation.com/about/team/charles) prepared and filed our PCT (International Patent) application. Provisional patent applications are not available to public for viewing. I met with Charles two weeks ago and provided him with all the schematics and firmware flowcharts from the prototype build so that he can fold them into the patent application. We have been constantly improving our patent application claims while moving through product development.
I hope this answers your questions.
Best regards,
Gregg Sullivan
President & CEO
GeoTraq, Inc.
206-283-1400
www.geotraq.com
All started from this
Quote:
againstallodds
Re: TheBigPicture post# 26023
Post # of 26035
Usually 12 months...
Patent application can be searched on USPTO...
Patent delivered as well...
I checked both, nothing with the name of gregg Sullivan nor geotraq.
I am far to be an expert, but LOGIC to me says that if there is been a constantly improving GTRQ patent application, then Patent must be delayed each time is improved the application. By the other hand the first "nonsayer" againstallodds made a mistake when he uses the word "USUALLY" ... so it is not A YEAR even in the the case patent is introduced and has not been touched by the invertor in any time. Wich is not the case as the other "nonsayer" offers all Gregg shared with him a year ago

