From what I can see yes. But this was a bit differ

From what I can see yes. But this was a bit different case, there wasn't black and white for some of the allegations, which is what casued the need for the oral arguments. We have seen that Sullivan submitted that they would be pleased to entertain oral arguments, the judges response was if it was needed to assist in her decision she would advise. I don't know if they will make it public before or during oral arguments(if they are required) but they will be available shortly after it takes place. Rosen look stupid(in my opinion) in the first oral arguments and would probably be just a waste of time for a judge that doesn't like to waste her time.It has been almost 3 weeks since that response, it is anybody's guess at this time. It really hasn't been that long, but with the lack of substantial anything and the fact that Sullivan pointed out Rosen's mo I think the judge will want to clear this and not be responsible for the companies unnecessary negative impact of this false suit for anymore time. In my opinion of course

GLTM

If you try to defend yourself against lies of the board moderators your post will be deleted. Just like the board they claim to be better than!!! Watch who you trust especially the "long term investors" that support the real attackers!