Are you serious? "Patent was allowed to lapse" where did you come up with that nonsense? A PCT application is based on a patent application of which it will clame priority from (which in LIT's case is the patent that has LAPSED). You cannot claim priority over a lapsed patent!! Simple as that.
Doesn't really matter because AG probably realized that his patent application is bogus, as he didn't pay the patent renewal fee (which is why it lapsed), says enough I think.
Anyway, I'm still baffled that none of the LIT defenders here have asked AG for more details to clear this up somehow.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
1.1¢ |
Change
0.000(0.00%) |
Mkt cap ! $18.59M | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| 1.1¢ | 1.1¢ | 1.0¢ | $5.165K | 479.0K |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 28 | 6972961 | 1.0¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| 1.1¢ | 1903975 | 3 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 14.32pm 23/07/2025 (20 minute delay) ? |
| LIT (ASX) Chart |