thanks for posting this SC, but I'm afraid I may h
Post# of 72440
Posted On: 06/09/2016 7:05:26 AM
thanks for posting this SC, but I'm afraid I may have been mistaken.
I'm hearing from a couple of trusted sources that the ruling does not specifically state "with prejudice" and that Rosen is still able to appeal. After the judges thorough dismantling of Rosens "case", I doubt they want anything more to do with Sullivan and co.
This is the part that had me confused:
"Plaintiff has requested leave to replead, without presenting any concrete means of remedying the deficiencies identified in this Opinion. Because Plaintiff has previously been given leave to replead, and because the Court finds that any further repleading would be futile, Plaintiff’s request is DENIED."
Sorry folks, I've failed you.
As punishment, I will limit myself to gloating over Rosen et al, at only 95%.
Ha ha Rosen. Ha ha Phillip Kim. You are awful.
That was tough but fair.
I'm hearing from a couple of trusted sources that the ruling does not specifically state "with prejudice" and that Rosen is still able to appeal. After the judges thorough dismantling of Rosens "case", I doubt they want anything more to do with Sullivan and co.
This is the part that had me confused:
"Plaintiff has requested leave to replead, without presenting any concrete means of remedying the deficiencies identified in this Opinion. Because Plaintiff has previously been given leave to replead, and because the Court finds that any further repleading would be futile, Plaintiff’s request is DENIED."
Sorry folks, I've failed you.
As punishment, I will limit myself to gloating over Rosen et al, at only 95%.
Ha ha Rosen. Ha ha Phillip Kim. You are awful.
That was tough but fair.
(0)
(0)Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼