That is cool Sara that the patent co-ownership is in Sarah LaFevers name along with the other fella which I guess was an equity investor. I assume since she must of been part of the declared ownership of the patents is why her name was used in the court case. Dan must of have put that ownership in her name as some sort of asset protection.
I assume during actual court case there were probably exhibits such as blueprints and maybe even actual receivers from LaFever and Remington presented that would not be part of the decision that was recorded.
Very cool.
|
Hybrid Mode