if they met the dec 4 deadline, 6 months would be

if they met the dec 4 deadline, 6 months would be June 4- but as we agree we dont know whether they met that deadline for that round

in some disciplines and countries (like Mexico, where they take a 2 week christmas vacation and few things get done in December) a Dec 4 deadline would be odd timing due to end of year and christmas considerations which might delay actual consideration to January, but i have no proof of such considerations re the dec 4 deadline re USA NSF

4-9-18: 'One grant application has been filed with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and two additional are planned with The National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Biomedical Advance Research and Development Authority (BARDA). Two of the applications are for funding for a pre-test for use with the N-Assay modified ELISA diagnostic and the BARDA application is for the use of the N-Assay for diagnostics of bio-threat agents."


have to assume NIH is BARDA -but since they never verified whether the NSF "in process" application mentioned in the 11-27-17 update was actually submitted by Dec 4,we dont know whether its one of the 2 additional NSF apps to be filed or not
depending on how tightly you circumscribe the word 'planned', the 11-27-17 'inprocess' NSF could be part of the 2 planned NSF filings or not

longs should also remember the multiple parties interested in either buying a geographically prescribed european flat pack patent or licensing from NNLX in the same theater -serious negotiations could not begin til the patents were published in the European Union and the waiting period for any challenges was over in the EU -and such negotiations are almost always accompanied by NDA's bc the companies negotiating for such dont know want their competitors to know what they are doing til they have something concrete