RTB: Neither side "won." That's the nature of a settlement. -- each side gets something beneficial to its interests. If either side demanded a "win," it would have needed to take its case to final judgment. It is certainly true that the terms of a settlement will often favor the interests of one party in comparison to the other. And since getting its nominees on the ballot was imperative for 13D, you can reasonably declare "mission accomplished" via the settlement. However, I suspect that Rosenbaum would have greatly preferred to have had his initial notice of nominations accepted without challenge by CYDY. The need for multiple attempted cures of deficiencies has definitely highlighted them for shareholders paying attention.

It should also be noted that the nature of these lawsuits was unusual in the respect that 13D was afforded several opportunities, including the settlement agreement itself, to cure deficiencies in its nominating notice in order to accomplish its mission. If given enough mulligans, almost any golfer can finally put a tee shot in the fairway. But the necessity for repeated do overs will never instill confidence in one's playing partner. Accordingly, I would suggest that the "winner" of the lawsuits won't be determined until the votes are counted on Oct 28.