Next-door neighbor is an attorney. He read the ruling, and essentially said same as Respert. There is no confusion. The bond money issuance is standard; and the ruling sets a great tone for CYDY for the remaining elements of this case.

Quote:

---

Someone on YMB (I think) posted an excerpt from the original request from Sidley on behalf of Cytodyn. In it there was wording around this bond where the statement said something like "here's what we're asking and Cytodyn is even willing to put up a bond..."

Basically, if this is true, it's just part of what was offered by Cytodyn to get this ball rolling. Someone also stated that there's confusion around this bond. It's not payment to Amarex but rather a bond that would be used to cover all the related costs if the injunction were later to be determined to have not been justified. I think we all know it's justified.

Hopefully I've cleared this up for all of you non-lawyer types.

Yours in law,

Respert24Esquire, Message Board Attorney to the Stars

Read More: https://investorshangout.com/post/view?id=630...z7Fn9AJsq9

---