I'm actually quite struck by the irony ...  this analysis (and your matching Young's number suggests its pretty close to "correct" as per accounting standards) could theoretically help SCOX in that it shows that there is a "real company" there to protect.   One capable of being (and having been) damaged if ever there were any real tortuous actions against it or going forward by expeditious actions by the courts.    But at the same time it gives Novell cause to say that there is real value there from which to extract the monies owed it and likewise that there is some value in the company that real stockholders (if there are any!) owned as equity value and the current management destroyed utterly with Lanham violations.

The demonstration of real value is quite the two edged sword.