(Total Views: 625)
Posted On: 01/02/2022 9:21:16 PM
Post# of 148899
I was reading Aaron's take on the lawsuit. Looks like you guys have the same take. From YMB:
Aaron
"As you may know, an amended lawsuit against Cytodyn was filed December 21st. Plaintiffs are disgruntled shareholders who claim severe losses on the stock when they brought high and sold low.
It's a 215 page brief and I am going through it. Not finished yet but I thought I would prepare you guys for what to expect.
First with 215 pages you would think they have all the pertinent data for such a complaint but the majority of the pages are just a history lesson and transcripts from proactive videos and CC Investor calls.
In point of fact the lawyers don't really KNOW MUCH AT ALL about the facts. But don't take my word for it! Take theirs!
Shareholders lawsuit complaint, page 1(Arabic) lines 19-22 (highlighted words by me):
"Many of the RELEVANT FACTS are KNOWN ONLY by DEFENDANTS (defined below) or are exclusively within their custody, possession, or control. Plaintiffs BELIEVE that substantial additional evidentiary support WILL exist.... AFTER a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and/or discovery.
So where are they getting 215 pages of material? Well on page 124 attorneys quote a significant amount of information from a biotech specialist named.... (Wait for it) Adam Feuerstein!
A second Feuerstein article is quoted in depth as proof of their allegations on page 126.
On page 127 is a lengthy quote from Amber Tong of Endpoint News (the irony that after over 100 pages of accusations about Emerging Growth as a suspect source of news, the attorneys turn to Statnews, and Endpoint News should not be lost on anyone).
I will post a much more full analysis by Tuesday as to deficiencies in the complaint that lead me to believe they will not succeed in their litigation."
Aaron
"As you may know, an amended lawsuit against Cytodyn was filed December 21st. Plaintiffs are disgruntled shareholders who claim severe losses on the stock when they brought high and sold low.
It's a 215 page brief and I am going through it. Not finished yet but I thought I would prepare you guys for what to expect.
First with 215 pages you would think they have all the pertinent data for such a complaint but the majority of the pages are just a history lesson and transcripts from proactive videos and CC Investor calls.
In point of fact the lawyers don't really KNOW MUCH AT ALL about the facts. But don't take my word for it! Take theirs!
Shareholders lawsuit complaint, page 1(Arabic) lines 19-22 (highlighted words by me):
"Many of the RELEVANT FACTS are KNOWN ONLY by DEFENDANTS (defined below) or are exclusively within their custody, possession, or control. Plaintiffs BELIEVE that substantial additional evidentiary support WILL exist.... AFTER a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and/or discovery.
So where are they getting 215 pages of material? Well on page 124 attorneys quote a significant amount of information from a biotech specialist named.... (Wait for it) Adam Feuerstein!
A second Feuerstein article is quoted in depth as proof of their allegations on page 126.
On page 127 is a lengthy quote from Amber Tong of Endpoint News (the irony that after over 100 pages of accusations about Emerging Growth as a suspect source of news, the attorneys turn to Statnews, and Endpoint News should not be lost on anyone).
I will post a much more full analysis by Tuesday as to deficiencies in the complaint that lead me to believe they will not succeed in their litigation."
(4)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
