I am not debating the issue of the halt nor is JJ.

I am not debating the issue of the halt nor is JJ. JJ is saying that the screw up in the dividend was FINRA's fault. How can that be when the law clearly states that if the dividend is 25% or more of the pps that the ex-dividend date will be one day after the pay date. Everyone knows that anyone owning the stock on the ex-dividend date is entitled to the dividend. JJ is saying "the company wanted only those who owned the stock on the record date to get paid".....it doesn't matter what one wants...it matters what the law is and the law is clear.
Read the rules on mergers at the FINRA site. I posted it here last week. It is clear that mergers must be approved FIRST by FINRA then the stock is halted. FINRA has not approved this merger but JJ is saying it is done. He is also saying that if they are sued (which I stated in a PM to him/her that they would be) that they would move the assets to yet another corporation and since they were in Mexico they would be untouchable. Does that sound like someone who is even remotely ethical in their thinking? I pray that this person is in no way connected with Milagros or Calissio because if he//she is speaking on behalf of the company then we have more problems then we want to even think about.