If you have had 5 HIV tests that have been negative, it is extremely unlikely that you have HIV that was transmitted two years ago. If your question is can you be infected 2 years earlier and it be negative on tests each time for two years, the answer is virtually impossible. The reason for this is that the oraquick test has a 99.6% sensitivity and 100% specificity, meaning that the people who did not have the virus would test negative 100% of the time and that out of 1000 people who were infected, 996 people would test positive. This means that 4 people out of 1000 would test negative while still being infected - meaning 0.04% chance that if you had HIV, you would test negative. Now, if you this take this test twice, your chances go from 0.04% to 0.04%x0.04%=0.0016% chance, meaning out of 1,000 people, less than 2 people will have HIV but test negative. Take the test 1 more time, and now your chances are 0.000064%, meaning less than 1 person in 1000. The test is good for detecting virus infections that are greater than 3 months. So to answer your question, it is very very very unlikely that after 2 Oraquick and 3 other HIV tests that were negative, you would have HIV (unless you had a new exposure since that time.
I am attaching a link from the cdc for more information about the oraquick HIV test for your information: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/qa/oraqck.htm
As far as dormacy for the virus - it is certainly possible for a person to be asymptomatic from HIV for months, years, to even decades, meaning that they might not experience any symptoms and their white blood cell count can remain in the normal range for a long time, in some cases indefinitely. They can remain infected with HIV but maintain undetectable viral loads (while still their HIV test would be positive). This is not the same as a dormant herpes virus, however, that can hide virion particles in the nerve ganglia and not cause clinical infection. They are similar in the fact that the patient is not symptomatic, but the mechanisms are different and the word dormant is not frequently used to describe latent HIV infection.
I hope this is helpful. Please let me know if I can answer any further questions.