Mr. Tucker:

Concerning my situation with StairMaster Sports/Medical Products, Inc. On the surface, it’s a matter of patent infringement, unfair competition, anti-trust, and racial discrimination. At the core it’s a case of StairMaster not being straightforward, direct or honest, treating me with a complete lack of respect, doing business without the highest ethical standards, not assigning responsibility or accountability, and my shocking inability to find anyone up to and including the CEO, willing to do the right thing. You asked for "color" Mr. Tucker, here we go.

On May 9, 2000, I sent StairMaster’s CEO, Tom Bryant the following fax:

MR. BRYANT:

PER YOUR COMPANY’S POLICY, "...StairMaster Sports/Medical Products is a strong believer in patent, copyright, and trademark rights and will respect any such valid protection...," I WOULD LIKE TO MEET WITH YOU CONCERNING A PATENT I HOLD THAT ONE OF YOUR PRODUCTS BRINGS INTO QUESTION.

I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATED IT IF YOU WOULD PLEASE EITHER CALL ME AT 253.596.8363 OR EMAIL AT BULLSEYEMARK@YAHOO.COM TO ARRANGE A MEETING. THANK YOU. GOD BLESS.

After numerous follow-up voicemails to Mr. Bryant, I finally caught him on the phone June 16. I explained the nature of my business as a "matter of questionable intellectual property" and said I would like to meet with him personally. He asked me what product of StairMaster’s was in question, to which I told him the rack for the stepper.

Mr. Bryant told me he did not recall the fax of May 9, but if received, he probably sent it to the legal department. Mr. Bryant also said the matter sounded like something Dr. Cedric Bryant, VP of New Product Development & Sports Medicine should be involved with. I explained to Tom Bryant I had already spoken with Cedric Bryant. I went on to explain to him that over a period of eight years, I had spoken with nothing but VP’s and now was ONLY interested in speaking with the CEO. I further explained to Tom Bryant I had reached that impasse right as Don Wanat was on the way out as CEO. I told him I realized he had bigger fish to fry once he took the helm, so I patiently waited to speak with the "man with whom the buck stops."

Mr. Bryant asked me to fax him a copy of my patent and said he would get back to me. Once again, making it crystal clear that I only wanted to deal with him at this point, I faxed the following to Tom Bryant on June 20:

MR. BRYANT:

THIS IS FOLLOWING UP ON MY MAY 9, 2000 FAX, OUR PHONE CONVERSATION LAST WEEK AND THE FAX OF MY PATENT TO YOU RIGHT AFTERWARD. I’M STANDING BY TO HEAR FROM YOU ON ARRANGING A MEETING AT YOUR EARLIEST CONVENIENCE. PLEASE CONFIRM RECEIPT OF THE FAX BY EMAILING ME AT BULLSEYEMARK@YAHOO.COM . THANK YOU. GOD BLESS.

[ Refaxed 7/15; Left voicemail 7/20. NO RESPONSE.]

On June 28, 2000, I received a "suspiciously timed" phone call from Cedric Bryant. After mentioning two voicemails (on separate matters unrelated to StairMaster) he received from me; two years and the other three months prior that he never returned, Dr. Bryant eased into saying he had spoken with Tom Bryant. I asked him if this was the call I’ve been waiting for from Tom Bryant. He asked me if I was expecting a call from Tom Bryant; I told him yes. Nonetheless, Dr. Bryant delved into the matter and I reluctantly jumped in with him. We spoke for approximately 20 minutes.

At the end of the conversation, Dr. Bryant said, "...since the holiday is coming up, I’ll get back to you on July 7..." I faxed the following on June 30:

DR. BRYANT:

THANKS FOR YOUR CALL ON WEDNESDAY, I ENJOYED OUR CONVERSATION. I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM YOU NEXT FRIDAY AS AGREED. AS YOU MENTIONED, YOU CAME INTO THE STAIRMASTER/RackIt™ MATTER "IN THE MIDDLE." SINCE I CONTACTED THE "OTHER MR. BRYANT," I’M NOT SURE HOW YOU GOT RE-INVOLVED. NONETHELESS, ALLOW ME TO FILL IN SOME MISSING PIECES AND RECAP SOME OF WHAT YOU ALREADY KNOW.

I INVENTED RackIt™ IN 1990 AND INTRODUCED IT AT THE 1991 IRSA SHOW IN SAN FRANCISCO. SINCE MY MARKET RESEARCH SHOWED LIFECYCLE WAS THE MOST PREVALENT MACHINE IN THE INDUSTRY, THE FIRST RackIt™ WAS DESIGNED FOR THAT PRODUCT AND INJECTION MOLDED. AFTER SHIPPING HUNDREDS OF THAT MODEL, MY COMPANY BEGAN GETTING NUMEROUS REQUESTS FOR THE STAIRMASTER 4000PT.

SINCE MY COMPANY LACKED THE FINANCING FOR ANOTHER INJECTION MOLD, IT WAS FORCED TO SETTLE FOR GETTING THE 4000PT RackIt™ TO MARKET WITH A VACUUM-FORMED PRODUCT. DESPITE HAVING MORE MACHINES IN THE FIELD, THE LIFECYCLE RackIt™ WAS BEING OUTSOLD AT A THREE-TO-ONE RATE BY THE 4000PT RackIt™. THIS POSED A CONSIDERABLE PROBLEM, SINCE THE QUALITY OF THE VACUUM-FORMED PRODUCT WAS INFERIOR TO THE INJECTION MOLDED ONE. THE PROBLEM WAS COMPOUNDED BY THE RETURN OF BROKEN UNITS THAT THE HOLDERS HAD SNAPPED OFF OF, DUE TO PEOPLE LEANING ON THE CONSOLE. THIS PROBLEM WAS READILY SOLVED BY MOVING THE HOLDERS FROM THE SIDE OF RackIt™ TO THE BACK WITH ANOTHER VACUUM-FORM MOLD, BUT THE INJECTION MOLD QUALITY STILL NEEDED TO BE MATCHED.

TO SOLVE THIS QUALITY PROBLEM, MY COMPANY DECIDED TO CONTACT STAIRMASTER SPORTS/MEDICAL PRODUCTS IN 1992. MY COMPANY WAS HOPEFUL OF GETTING A CONTRACT TO PACKAGE RackIt™ WITH STAIRMASTER’S MACHINES TO FINANCE AN INJECTION MOLD. ARMED WITH STRONG SALES/ORDER NUMBERS AND A PRODUCT THAT HAD BEEN DEVELOPED TO ITS NEXT LOGIC STAGE BY MARKET TESTING, AND CUSTOMER FEEDBACK, THE POTENTIAL OF A RELATIONSHIP WITH STAIRMASTER WAS EXTREMELY EXCITING. AN HOUR-LONG MEETING WITH BERNIE BOGLIOLI, VP OF MARKETING, RESULTED IN EVEN MORE EXCITEMENT. AFTER SHOWING MR. BOGLIOLI THE "NEWLY DESIGNED 4000PT RackIt™," HE SAID STAIRMASTER WOULD BE MORE INTERESTED IN BUYING THE PRODUCT OUTRIGHT, WHICH IS ITS POLICY CONCERNING PRODUCTS LIKE RackIt™. HE SAID HE WOULD GET BACK TO ME IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS WITH A PROPOSAL.

AFTER INVENTING RackIt™, MY GOAL WAS TO WORK WITH THE PREMIER COMPANY IN THE FITNESS INDUSTRY. THAT MEETING BROUGHT MY DREAM CLOSER TO REALITY. HOWEVER, I WAITED THREE WEEKS FOR THE PROPOSAL MR. BOGLIOLI HAD PROMISED, BUT IT NEVER CAME. MY FOLLOW-UP CALLS TO HIM WERE NEVER RETURNED. UPON SEEING MR. BOGLIOLI AT THE NEXT CLUB INDUSTRY SHOW, HE SIMPLY DISMISSED THE ENTIRE MATTER BY STATING THAT STAIRMASTER DIDN’T WANT WATER NEAR THE MACHINES OR THE DISPLAY COVERED BY A BOOK OR MAGAZINE.

IN 1993, MY COMPANY DEVISED A NEW MARKETING STRATEGY TO ENABLE THE TYPE OF DISTRIBUTION OF RackIt™ MOST BENEFICIAL FOR THE COMPANY AND THE INDUSTRY. THE NEW STRATEGY EVENTUALLY EVOLVED INTO THE "WORLD’S MOST POWERFUL SPORTS DRINK ADVERTISING PROGRAM" CALLED, "AD/RACK" VALUED AT $5 MILLION. FOR THIS PROGRAM, RackIt™ EVOLVED FROM THE ORIGINAL THREE-PIECE DESIGN INTO A SOLID, ONE-PIECE UNIT.

[SIDE NOTE: SEED AND BERRY ADVISED MY COMPANY IT HAD TRADE DRESS RIGHTS ON THE ORIGINAL DESIGN.]

IN APRIL 1998, AFTER PUTTING ALL OF THE PIECES IN PLACE FOR THE AD/RACK PROGRAM, I DECIDED TO CONTACT STAIRMASTER SPORTS/MEDICAL PRODUCTS TO MAKE ANOTHER ATTEMPT AT WORKING TOGETHER. I CALLED MR. BOGLIOLI TO ARRANGE A MEETING. WHEN MR. BOGLIOLI ASKED WHAT I WANTED TO MEET ABOUT, I TOLD HIM (AND YOU, ON THE SPEAKER PHONE) I NEEDED TO MEET WITH HIM CONCERNING RackIt™. DURING THAT MAY MEETING WITH YOU AND MR. BOGLIOLI, I EXPLAINED THE AD/RACK PROGRAM, DISPLAYED THE ONE-PIECE RackIt™, AND INVITED STAIRMASTER TO WORK WITH MY COMPANY SINCE ITS RACK WAS INFRINGING THE PATENT I HAD PENDING. I WAS ESSENTIALLY OFFERING STAIRMASTER AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROFIT FROM VIRTUALLY EVERYONE OF ITS COMPETITOR’S MACHINES, BUT THAT MEETING WAS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.

AFTER YOU ADVISED ME THAT STAIRMASTER WAS NOT INTERESTED IN JOINING OUR COMPANY WITH THE AD/RACK PROGRAM, YOU PUT ME IN TOUCH WITH LEE ROWLS, VP OF NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT & ENGINEERING, CONCERNING THE PATENT SITUATION. AFTER A COUPLE OF CONVERSATIONS WITH MR. ROWLS, HE TRIED TO CONVINCE ME THAT STAIRMASTER’S RACK IS PRIOR ART TO THE ONE I HOLD A PATENT ON. HOWEVER, I DON’T THINK MR. ROWLS WAS AWARE OF MY MEETING WITH MR. BOGLIOLI WHERE I REVEALED THE NEWLY DESIGNED RackIt™ (WHICH APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN USED AS MODEL FOR STAIRMASTER’S RACK) THAT SEED AND BERRY ADVISED TRADE DRESS RIGHTS WERE ATTACHED TO AND EVENTUALLY WAS DEVELOPED INTO OUR CURRENT PRODUCT.

I WAS ENCOURAGED WHEN YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU WANT THIS SITUATION RESOLVED. I LOOK FORWARD TO OUR NEXT CONVERSATION. UNTIL THEN, ENJOY LIFE. GOD BLESS.

I did not receive a call from Dr. Bryant on July 7. However, he did leave me a voicemail on July 13 in which he said, he had met with all of the parties he deemed necessary, had some information for me, but wanted to confirm the number of my patent. Later that day, I left a voicemail confirming the number Dr. Bryant had read. A week went by and I left a voicemail for Dr. Bryant on July 20 advising him that I was still standing by from his July 13 message.

On July 24, I received a call from Dr. Bryant. He was on a speaker phone and said he had Bernie Boglioli, Director of Sales with him. Dr. Bryant thanked me for my June 30 fax, told me that a law firm independent of Seed & Berry (due to the conflict of interest of dual representation) gave its "opinion" that there is no infringement on the product StairMaster manufactures and the one I hold a patent on. From my perspective, Dr. Bryant basically told me that the line in "STAIRMASTER SPORTS/MEDICAL PRODUCTS, INC.’S POLICY AND AGREEMENT CONCERNING IDEA SUBMISSION" that reads, "...StairMaster Sports/Medical Products is a strong believer in patent, copyright, and trademark rights and will respect any such valid protection you have or may obtain for your submitted idea," is not true and CEO Tom Bryant would not be calling me.

I submitted a product to StairMaster and didn’t have a patent. I obtained a patent. The company IS NOT respecting it, but preparing to challenge it. StairMaster used deceptive negotiating tactics. It gained an opportunity to obtain proprietary information. That led to an unfair advantage to exploit its position and "leap frog" me. That denied me my opportunity to reap the "Free Enterprise-`better mouse trap’-Smith Economics-rewards" of MY God-given intellectual property. THAT IS NOT RESPECT! THAT IS ONLY CORPORATE POWER!!

The first line in STAIRMASTER SPORTS/MEDICAL PRODUCTS, INC.’S POLICY AND AGREEMENT CONCERNING IDEA SUBMISSION reads:

StairMaster Sports/Medical Products, Inc. welcomes your submission of ideas concerning its business, existing products, and possible future products.

In a 1992 submission meeting with Bernie Boglioli, StairMaster welcomed my product as it related to its business of selling cardiovascular exercise machines. Mr. Boglioli readily saw how my product would enhance his existing product line. However, instead of dealing in good faith and doing the right thing, StairMaster made it a "future" product.

Paragraph One of the POLICY reads:

StairMaster Sports/Medical Products, Inc. has an experienced staff conducting ongoing research and development to improve its products and develop new products. We have already received product ideas from other outside sources. In addition, we have access to a large body of patents, documents, and other information which we can use in our research and development efforts. Consequently, we find that some of the ideas submitted to us are already known to us or readily available to us from other sources. Further, some ideas submitted are not subject to legal protection by patent, copyright, or trademark and, as such, have little value since they can be freely copied by our competitors.

Despite StairMaster Sports/Medical Product’s experienced staff and all of the ongoing R & D to improve its products, I’m the one that conceived the idea which eventually led to a dramatically improved experience on the StairMaster® machine from "continual hydration and redirection of mental focus." The "large body of patents, documents, and other information" NEVER came into play. The last sentence of the paragraph states, "...some ideas submitted are not subject to legal protection by patent...," however, mine was.

Paragraph Two of the POLICY reads:

For these reasons, we cannot consider any idea as secret or confidential. If we did, it might prevent our effective use of information already known or available to us, and put us at a disadvantage with our competitors. While we will not enter a confidential relationship with you, StairMaster Sports/Medical Products is a strong believer in patent, copyright, and trademark rights and will respect any such valid protection you have or may obtain for your submitted idea.

I submitted my product to Mr. Boglioli in the effort of having it accompany the StairMaster® in the box. Mr. Boglioli’s verbal proposal to "...buy the whole thing like we did with the mats since we like to own all of our products..." was exciting enough for me to keep confidential. Little did I know that would lead to me having an unfair disadvantage as StairMaster’s competitor instead of a collaborator as hoped for and proposed. While I did not enter into a "confidential relationship" with StairMaster, I was certain that a company of StairMaster’s stature and World-wide prestige would most certainly "respect" the proprietary nature of the submitted product, the patent that I "may obtain" and the R & D of future models.

Paragraph Three of the POLICY reads:

If you wish to submit your idea to StairMaster Sports/Medical Products, we will consider it under the specific terms and conditions set out below. If you agree to these terms and conditions, you can be assured that your idea will receive our careful consideration. Assuming that you wish to proceed on this basis, please sign one copy of this Policy and Agreement document and return it to us, together with any additional materials you wish to submit. Retain a copy of everything for your file. This constitutes a binding agreement concerning the terms of your idea submission, so if you have any questions you should contact your attorney. In any event, we encourage you to consult with a qualified patent attorney to pursue any patents or other forms of protection that may be available for you idea. A submitted idea covered by a patent is more valuable than an uprotected idea.

Not only am I "assured," but CERTAIN that my product received so much of StairMaster’s "careful consideration," the company found a way to convince itself there was no sense working with me. Although I did not see this document until 1998, I did what this paragraph suggests and consulted with a "qualified patent attorney to pursue any patents or other forms of protection..." As destiny would have it, the qualified attorney was the firm Seed & Berry which has been QUALIFIED enough for StairMaster’s patents, but somehow has become UNQUALIFIED since this patent belongs to me and StairMaster is prepared to challenge it.

Additionally, two years ago I made a joint-venture proposal (valued at $45 million in three years, with patent pending) to StairMaster and Dr. Bryant wanted to throw me out of his office. Despite the economic and intrinsic value, the idea did not get "careful consideration" despite being backed by a patent. The last sentence of Paragraph Three is moot.

Paragraph Four of the POLICY reads:

Whether your submitted idea will eventually be used depends on a great many factors, among them how practical it is, what possible markets exist, and whether it can be adapted to our products or product line. Until we have made a complete investigation and entered into a separate written contract with you, we can assume no obligation of confidence, and we can pay no compensation. If your submitted idea sufficiently interests us, we will negotiate for the purchase of your idea or rights to use your idea. Your idea submission and any attempt to reach and agreement will not, however, impose any obligations on either party. Of course, submitting your idea to us will not be a grant of any rights you may hold for your idea under the patent, copyright, or trademark laws.

My submitted product was eventually used. The factors all checked out. It was exquisitely practical and the market was begging for it based on my company’s R&D efforts. It also adapted to StairMaster’s product line like the glove did to the hand. The product "sufficiently interested" StairMaster, but it’s been eight long years and the company up until June 24, 2000, has yet to show good faith and "negotiate for a purchase" for the "rights to use" of my product.

Paragraph Five of the POLICY reads:

If StairMaster Sports/Medical Products decides, after reviewing your submitted idea, that we are not interested, we will let you know as soon as possible. Please remember that our decision is based on factors that often include proprietary information about our company and its confidential research and development projects, and business plans. We cannot agree in advance to give you specific reasons for our decision.

After the submission meeting, Bernie Boglioli did not let me "...know as soon as possible." He did not fax the letter of agreement, he just disappeared. He wouldn’t return my calls. I had to show up at the StairMaster booth during a tradeshow in New York to find out what happened to his proposal. Mr. Boglioli gave two reasons, "...we don’t want water near the machines or the display panel covered with a magazine."

The rest of the POLICY borders on "corporate piracy," yet continues to maintain respect for patents. Despite its repeated claims of "patent respect," Dr. Bryant’s short phone conversation on June 24 basically voided the POLICY completely. How ironic that a meeting I requested concerning one line, has mushroomed into an indictment of the entire POLICY. More ironic, Dr. Bryant is the one who sent it to me. Most ironic, is the circumstance leading to that.

In March of 1998, I placed a series of phone calls to Bernie Boglioli requesting a meeting. Mr. Boglioli did not return any of my voicemails. My persistence eventually got me on the phone with him and to my surprise, he introduced Dr. Cedric Bryant on the speaker phone. All of my previous contact with Mr. Boglioli was independent of anyone else. Now for some strange reason (A. Mr. Boglioli’s attempt at covering his butt for botching things in ‘92, B. The company ensuring that he didn’t make any more verbal proposals on its behalf, C. Both), he had someone on the phone who I had never heard of. Then Mr. Boglioli turned the conversation over to Dr. Bryant after asking me what I wanted to meet about. I told Mr. Boglioli and Dr. Bryant, "I want to talk about RackIt™." At that point, Dr. Bryant interjected he would send me some paperwork and once I returned it signed, we could arrange a meeting. The letter was dated April 16, 1998.

Dear Mr. Allen:

Thank you for contacting us regarding your product idea(s). Due to legal purposes, we must have the following form filled out and signed by you before we can proceed to review your product idea(s).

Please return your signed agreement with your product information. Once we have received the signed agreement, we will be able to proceed with our review process.

Sincerely,

Cedric X. Bryant, Ph.D., FACSM
Director of New Product Development
and Sports Medicine

CXB:rc

Enc.

A meeting was set and despite having it scheduled at least three weeks in advance, Dr. Bryant and Mr. Boglioli made my partner and I wait for well over an hour. That type of disrespect had just come to be expected. Upon sitting down in Dr. Bryant’s office, I got right to the point. I explained that I did not sign the agreement since I was not submitting a new idea. I went on to recount how we had reached an unfortunate impasse, but had found a way for both parties to make it a "Win/Win situation." I introduced and explained "The World’s Most Powerful Sports Drink Advertising Program" and showed the newest model of my product. Since I had a patent pending and StairMaster has a product that will infringe it, I said it was a "clear signal that our paths were so parallel, it was the perfect time to finally work together."

Dr. Bryant and Mr. Boglioli became extremely nervous. Dr. Bryant insisted that I had "totally misrepresented" myself on the phone and that he was inclined to end the meeting. They both (almost simultaneously) said they were "uncomfortable discussing anything having to do with patents." Dr. Bryant continued questioning my integrity by insisting I told them I was there to discuss a new product. I reminded them that during our phone conversation I was very clear about meeting to discuss "RackIt™." Had they actually thought I was there to discuss a NEW product, they would have been adamant about my signing the agreement per Dr. Byant’s letter and reluctant to prodeed without it; wouldn’t they?

I was finally able to settle both gentlemen down enough to continue with the meeting and present what I believed to be a way for StairMaster to make up for its past actions and for me to make up for lost revenue. My good faith (second) attempt at working with the company was met with scorn. However, Dr. Bryant did throw me a bone by saying he would present my proposal to the group that decides ventures like that. He said he would get back to me in approximately three weeks to let me know when I could present it to them. Approximately nine weeks later, Dr. Bryant told me the group was not interested.

Not interested? I never even made the pitch! Not interested in what? Not interested in professional courtesy? Not interested in hearing out a new idea? Not interested in upwards of $45 million in revenue? Not interested in profiting from virtually everyone of your competitor’s machines? Not interested in hearing about an idea from the guy that invented one of the most important cardio exercise machine-related products of the ‘90’s? Not interested in a second chance to make up for a "crystal clear, hindsight-heavy" missed opportunity? Not interested in righting a wrong? Not interested in what?

Since I mentioned "one of the most important cardio exercise machine-related products of the ‘90’s," allow me to address that right here. Like BASF’s slogan, "We don’t make the products you use, we make the products you use better," RackIt™ made cardio exercise machines better! In the ‘80’s when the cardio craze hit, seeing the flashing lights and remaining time of your workout was interesting, if not all that motivating. By the ‘90’s, cardio machines where ready to go the next level; enter RackIt™.

RackIt™ is an important product from both physiological and psychological perspectives. Physiologically speaking, RackIt™ is imperative as it enables protracted water intake during the workout. Not only are you dehydrating, but a dry mouth is torture during cardio exercise machine use! Protracted water intake during exercise is medically recommended. There’s nothing like quenching your thirst without having to leave the machine. Psychologically, RackIt™ is invaluable since mental energy is redirected into listening to music, looking at pictures in a magazine or reading a good book. Focusing on something other than "console countdown," while moving to the music makes the workout speed by with enjoyment. During the ‘90’s, there were many new cardio exercise innovations, but none as important to cardio exercise machines than RackIt™!

[Where was the "VP of New Product Development & Sports Medicine" between 1992 and 1998? Why wasn’t he in the submission meeting with Bernie Boglioli? Better yet, why did he have Mr. Boglioli on speaker phone just to tell me an attorney’s opinion last week?]

From a "Sports/Medical Products" perspective, RackIt™ was the perfect "hand and glove" fit to the StairMaster® in 1992. If StairMaster Sports/Medical Products, Inc. would "buy-out" the company that produced the rubber mats (as Mr. Boglioli referred to when proposing the same for RackIt™) that go under the machine, surely it would be as interested in a product that "specifically and essentially" enhances the time spent on a StairMaster®! Unfortunately, I believe this is where racism entered the picture.

From my vantage point, the corporation’s arrogance (of not coming up with the product itself) could not bring it to pay a young, Black man the type of money an innovation of such magnitude was worth! Collaborating with StairMaster was a dream I had since inventing the product. Instead the dream was dashed by the company feigning "not interested," waiting a few years, coming out with a similar product. And now despite my patent and its own POLICY, StairMaster has essentially told me, "Look, we stole it fair and square now get lost." Racism isn’t not liking a particular race. Racism is the economic and political means of "cutting them out from cutting their piece of the pie."

Proverbs 29:8 says, "Scornful men bring a city into a snare, but wise men turn away wrath." StairMaster has a law firm whose opinion that there is no infringement. I have an intellectual property firm whose opinion is, there is infringement. You can’t get any more scornful than that. It is inconceivable that this has reached the point of me trying to contact the Chairman of the Board. However, since Dr. John Rutledge holds that position and most of all believes in "doing the right thing," I trust he will step into this matter. I look forward to hearing back from you or Dr. Rutledge. Until then, enjoy life. God bless.

Cordially:

David Allen, aka Commando Dave
Point Man
Bulzi Marketing Group


Robert Tucker's reply?