I understand investors' concerns about this post; it's not a planned project removal as I was asked--it's site scrubbing. The University of Maryland profiles and point-of-care billing workflows were taken down because those institutional partnerships and prescription features were not supported as originally marketed.
Once compliance inquiries began, the company edited the site down from 5 steps to 4, removing point-of-care billing to reflect the reality that the product is an OTC topical patch, not an FDA-approved e-prescribing platform.
Univec and 11Three leadership made false public statements regarding patented status and institutional backing that are contradicted by primary public records:
Dr. Stephen Hoag confirmed directly that UMD's work was strictly on a transactional, "fee-for-service" basis. As a state agency, UMD does not endorse commercial products.
Application US 17/774,089 remains in Pending status and is assigned to Landrace Bioscience Inc., not an issued patent owned by UNVC or 11Three.
Even if 11Three claims legal title via an internal corporate merger, failing to record the merger or assignment with the USPTO leaves the public chain of title unverified. Because it remains unrecorded in USPTO public records, investors cannot verify corporate ownership claims from official public databases.
Under SEC Rule 10b-5 and OTC Markets disclosure rules, material statements regarding patent status, FDA regulatory pathways, and state university partnerships carry strict accuracy requirements. While routine promotional PR is often viewed as marketing fluff, calling a pending third-party application an issued corporate patent crosses from permissible corporate optimism into factual misrepresentation.
OTC Markets Group has a regulatory mandate to protect market integrity, and presenting documented before-and-after site modifications alongside public records provides clear, objective evidence of these discrepancies.
PL
Once compliance inquiries began, the company edited the site down from 5 steps to 4, removing point-of-care billing to reflect the reality that the product is an OTC topical patch, not an FDA-approved e-prescribing platform.
Univec and 11Three leadership made false public statements regarding patented status and institutional backing that are contradicted by primary public records:
Dr. Stephen Hoag confirmed directly that UMD's work was strictly on a transactional, "fee-for-service" basis. As a state agency, UMD does not endorse commercial products.
Application US 17/774,089 remains in Pending status and is assigned to Landrace Bioscience Inc., not an issued patent owned by UNVC or 11Three.
Even if 11Three claims legal title via an internal corporate merger, failing to record the merger or assignment with the USPTO leaves the public chain of title unverified. Because it remains unrecorded in USPTO public records, investors cannot verify corporate ownership claims from official public databases.
Under SEC Rule 10b-5 and OTC Markets disclosure rules, material statements regarding patent status, FDA regulatory pathways, and state university partnerships carry strict accuracy requirements. While routine promotional PR is often viewed as marketing fluff, calling a pending third-party application an issued corporate patent crosses from permissible corporate optimism into factual misrepresentation.
OTC Markets Group has a regulatory mandate to protect market integrity, and presenting documented before-and-after site modifications alongside public records provides clear, objective evidence of these discrepancies.
PL
