'Plaintiff also recently took the deposition of DTCC.'
meikodog Tuesday, 08/02/16 09:19:03 AM
Re: janice shell post# 45756
Post # of 45759
'Plaintiff also recently took the deposition of DTCC.'
Back in October DTCC submitted highly confidential information under seal in the Nebraska case. Now they have been deposed in the same case. By now their position and data on the matter are fully on the table.
Also, this is described as the 'first amended complaint', and there are still 50 'Does' listed as defendants. We are now past the deadline to add more defendants, but with an amended complaint I wonder if the judge might be open to a second amended complaint that might name even further defendants. Why else would COR keep the door open?
'Plaintiff also sent letters to the various brokerages, including the Brokerage Defendants, demanding return of funds that were wrongfully taken from Plaintiff. Many brokerages indicated that they could not return the funds without an order of the court, including Defendant NFS. ...........On May 10,2016, counsel for Plaintiff sent a letter to brokerages identified during discovery to have received fraudulent Calissio due bills, including the Brokerage Defendants, notifying them that Plaintiff had claims for unjust enrichment and demanding that the funds be remitted to COR. Certain banks complied.'
My guess is those banks and brokerages who facilitated minimal volume in the trading the Calissio shares just paid up when contacted about the threat of litigation as the amount involved didn't warrant getting into a litigation battle. NFS is willing to pay up given a court order, they probably are in the 1-3% range of volume. The big volume/money lies in the transactions conducted through Scottrade, Ameritrade and Etrade.
I was intrigued by this case before yesterday. Now I am fascinated.
meikodog Tuesday, 08/02/16 09:19:03 AM
Re: janice shell post# 45756
Post # of 45759
'Plaintiff also recently took the deposition of DTCC.'
Back in October DTCC submitted highly confidential information under seal in the Nebraska case. Now they have been deposed in the same case. By now their position and data on the matter are fully on the table.
Also, this is described as the 'first amended complaint', and there are still 50 'Does' listed as defendants. We are now past the deadline to add more defendants, but with an amended complaint I wonder if the judge might be open to a second amended complaint that might name even further defendants. Why else would COR keep the door open?
'Plaintiff also sent letters to the various brokerages, including the Brokerage Defendants, demanding return of funds that were wrongfully taken from Plaintiff. Many brokerages indicated that they could not return the funds without an order of the court, including Defendant NFS. ...........On May 10,2016, counsel for Plaintiff sent a letter to brokerages identified during discovery to have received fraudulent Calissio due bills, including the Brokerage Defendants, notifying them that Plaintiff had claims for unjust enrichment and demanding that the funds be remitted to COR. Certain banks complied.'
My guess is those banks and brokerages who facilitated minimal volume in the trading the Calissio shares just paid up when contacted about the threat of litigation as the amount involved didn't warrant getting into a litigation battle. NFS is willing to pay up given a court order, they probably are in the 1-3% range of volume. The big volume/money lies in the transactions conducted through Scottrade, Ameritrade and Etrade.
I was intrigued by this case before yesterday. Now I am fascinated.
Calissio Resources Group, Inc. (CRGP) Stock Research Links
