plaintiffs have to change the court rules and st

plaintiffs have to change the court rules and statutes re notice to be successful- and that cannot be done retroactively bc zn like everybody else has relied on the current law re notice!!!!

cant hold zn to a futuristic standard which does not yet exist!!

and these chasers entire case relies on a tweet or incomplete screenshot of an sec reply to a foia request which does not say zn is under investigation-and even if it did that still would not be the required legal notice!!!-

the complaint keeps shamelessly imputing notice to zn before zn had legal notice

the incomplete screenshot shows the foia request denied due to possible enforcement proceedings, which could mean a lot of things,including
boilerplate
a wide net for wide range of purposes

including possible enforcement proceedings re one of zn's suppliers-e.g, the parent co of the sub that leased the drilling rig to zn has been going thru some kind of bankruptcy proceedings

or re an individual of a supplier or connected to zn

nobody is a mind reader and yet thats essentially what the complaint expects zn to have been

co's cant be expected to list every possible action against them

the mar 12 10k and the may 8 10q included typical boilerplate language for the situation
i dont remember whether either the screenshot or the tweet preceded the mar 12 10k-

the whole case -the so called misleading statements plaintiffs claim zn made that zn was not being investigated by the sec- hinges on the argument zn should have known they were being investigated-but they could not have known until the sec followed traditional legal notice protocol-which did not occur til june 21 i believe-the summer solstice

so either the judge would have to take a very activist role to make a monumental change in the court rules and codified legislative law re notice- something that only the scotus could do-and not on a backdated basis
or the judge would have to dismiss,unless new facts arise

at some point in the discovery process,i would expect zn to make a summary judgement motion to dismiss as a frivolous lawsuit,based on what i've seen so far

trial court judges dont make the kinds of radical departure from current law precedents plaintiffs desire,which is why plaintiffs are asking for a jury trial-to play on emotions-bring out a grandmother in a wheelchair e.g., but emotions cannot violate the current system wide law of legal notice