For immediate release

                     COMMITTEE TO RESTORE STOCKHOLDER VALUE
                      REQUESTS ASSISTANCE AND REVIEW BY SEC

AUGUSTA,  GA  (JANUARY  18, 2007) THE COMMITTEE TO RESTORE STOCKHOLDER VALUE has
today  advised  that its legal counsel, Cutler Law Group, has forwarded a letter
to  the  Securities  and  Exchange Commission (SEC) detailing what the Committee
believes  is  a  scheme  to  mislead  and  defraud  shareholders  of Competitive
Technologies,  Inc.  (AMEX:  CTT)  in  connection  with  the  Annual  Meeting of
Shareholders  held  on  January  16, 2007. The Committee believes that it is the
CTT's  shareholders'  right  under  SEC  Rules  and  Regulations  to have a fair
opportunity  to  select  their  management  team,  and that by the actions taken
yesterday  by  current  management,  that  right  has  been  subverted.

Data  used in the Committee's letter to the SEC is ADP vote data from the day of
the  meeting.  The Committee believes that the CTT-hired election inspectors are
working  with  out-of-date  ADP  data  as  provided  several  days  earlier.

The  letter  to  the  SEC  provides  in  relevant  part  as  follows:

"The  shareholders  of  Competitive  Technologies,  Inc.  need  your  help.

The  "Annual Meeting of Shareholders" of Competitive Technologies, Inc. was held
yesterday  at 10 am at the American Stock Exchange. At that meeting, a scheme to
mislead  and  defraud the Competitive Technologies, Inc. shareholders was played
out  by  management  of  the  Company.

No sooner had the meeting commenced than the Chairman, Richard Carver, announced
that  "no  quorum" for the meeting was present and that consequently he moved to
adjourn.  In  an attempt to terminate the meeting, he called for a show of hands
and  sought  to  immediately  stop  the  meeting.

That  attempt  was  somewhat  thwarted  by  a demand by the Committee that (i) a
determination  that a quorum was indeed lacking be made and (ii) that any motion
to  adjourn  or otherwise must be made by ballot to ensure that those present in
person  and  by  proxy  could  appropriately  vote  on  the  matter.

Subsequent  to  that  attempt,  Mr.  Carver  and  the  independent inspectors of
election  confirmed  that  in truth, they had no idea as to whether a quorum was
present  and  had  not made ANY attempt to determine whether a quorum was indeed
present.  The  independent  inspectors  advised  that they had NOT been asked by
management  whether  a  quorum  was  present.

In  fact,  we  have been advised that employees of Competitive Technologies were
advised  that  Management  intended to declare that a quorum was not present and
terminate  the  meeting  the  day  before  the  meeting,  and  that  they  were
consequently  told  not  to  attend  the  meeting.

As is set forth in Exhibit A and Exhibit B to this letter, the Committee submits
that  a  minimum  of  4,117,348  shares  were  present in person or by proxy and
available  for vote at the meeting. That number includes votes "withheld" (which
would  count  towards  a quorum) as well as 120,000 shares voted in favor of the
opposition by Steve Wilson, a CTT shareholder, at the meeting. That is more than
the  4,005,000  shares  required  for  a  quorum.

The  Committee  also  submits  that  based  on vote totals received from ADP and
presented  as  proxies  at  the  meeting,  the  Committee  presented  a total of
2,278,723 shares voted in favor of the nominees of the Committee for election as
directors and a total of 1,665,998 were voted in favor of management's nominees.

With  those  numbers in mind, it is clear that Management's attempt to terminate
the  meeting  without  a  determination that a quorum was or was not present was
clearly  an  attempt  to  subvert  the shareholder voting process and give their
proxy  solicitation  firm, Morrow & Co., an additional period of time to seek to
change  votes.  As  we detailed in prior correspondence, we have determined that
Morrow  &  Co.  may  present  false and misleading statements to shareholders in
order  to  prevail  (for example, telling them that voting "withhold" on a white
proxy  would be voting against management -- when in fact that would effectively
terminate  a vote for the opposition). That simply thwarts the carefully crafted
shareholder  voting  process  set  forth  in  the  proxy  rules  and  prevents
shareholders  from  properly  exercising their voting privileges at the company.

As  you  might  imagine,  the many shareholders present at the meeting yesterday
were outraged by Management's behavior.  Many of those shareholders had traveled
from  all  over  the  country  to  attend  the  meeting.

The  end  result of the meeting was that it effectively remains open.  There has
been no determination as to whether a quorum was present or not, and the vote to
"adjourn"  until February 2, 2007 was also not ruled upon because the inspectors
of  election  took  ballots  and "went back to their office" to count the votes.
The  Opposition  voted  against that motion, and given the vote totals set forth
above,  we  believe  that  motion  failed.

The Committee believes that SEC action is warranted at this point to come in and
effectively  enjoin  further action by the Company pending a determination as to
whether  a  quorum  was  indeed  present and if so, the outcome of voting at the
meeting.  Given the prior actions of management, the shareholders who have voted
with  the  Committee  believe  that they are not capable of providing a fair and
impartial  forum  for  this  vote,  and  that  SEC  intervention  is  necessary.

Please feel free to call me if you have further questions on this matter.  Given
the  fact  that  the  Company has spent many hundreds of thousands of dollars in
fighting  this  battle,  we believe quick action is warranted to prevent further
erosion of shareholder value by permitting that group to expend further funds to
improperly  prevent  a  clearly  warranted  change  of  control  at  Competitive
Technologies, Inc. The Committee further believes that it has the votes to elect
its  slate  of  directors  and  that  management,  knowing  this fact, is merely
attempting  to perpetuate their position in control by controlling the process."

More  information  on  the  Committee's  proxy  filing  (DFRN14A,  filed  by
non-management  on  December  26,  2006)  is  available  at  the  SEC  website,
www.sec.gov, under company filings. Any questions can be addressed by contacting
          -
the  Committee.

Contact:     John  Derek  Elwin  III
Tel:         561  789  6449
Email:       restorevalue@yahoo.com