I see that a response from Sidley dated today. Sor
Post# of 154867
(Total Views: 706)
Posted On: 08/18/2021 6:08:13 PM
I see that a response from Sidley dated today. Sorry I can not post the link as it is just screen shots titled 8/18/21 “Plaintiffs reply in support of its motion for expedited discovery and expedited proceedings”
It goes on to mention the 13-D was using the word Premature and the the excuse that was a preliminary proxy and not the finished filing ,yet Sisley argued the securities laws doesn’t give 13-D a free pass to make false statements on proxy materials simply because definitive materials to be filed later. There are also several other keys points brought up by Sidley stating that this new “revised preliminary proxy raise more questions and concerns” CCTV now not listed on 13-D it involves the reporting of Rosenbombs and his son now excluded yet are part of the 13-d. There is def some shady shit going on. I hope Sidley tears 13-D a new one, I will be breaking out the popcorn for everyone if the judge orders that the Discovery is warranted and they can start digging the skeletons out of the SOB’s
It goes on to mention the 13-D was using the word Premature and the the excuse that was a preliminary proxy and not the finished filing ,yet Sisley argued the securities laws doesn’t give 13-D a free pass to make false statements on proxy materials simply because definitive materials to be filed later. There are also several other keys points brought up by Sidley stating that this new “revised preliminary proxy raise more questions and concerns” CCTV now not listed on 13-D it involves the reporting of Rosenbombs and his son now excluded yet are part of the 13-d. There is def some shady shit going on. I hope Sidley tears 13-D a new one, I will be breaking out the popcorn for everyone if the judge orders that the Discovery is warranted and they can start digging the skeletons out of the SOB’s
(12)
(0)