LateToLearn: Totally agree with you that "We don't

LateToLearn: Totally agree with you that "We don't have adequate facts" to accurately assess the many issues potentially involved in the Amarex lawsuit. I have not posted any "hunches" on this subject because, without access to Sidley's case file, anyone doing so is dealing with an extreme instance of not knowing what you don't know. For instance: NSF bought Amarex in 2019, but they are separate legal entities; so NSF would not be liable for the conduct of Amarex, but NSF could have agreed contractually to cover Amarex' liabilities or NSF might voluntarily agree to do so to protect its investment in Amarex. You need Sidley's file to competently address all the issues and permutations that may be in play in this lawsuit.

The above is not to say that I don't appreciate, and that the board shouldn't appreciate posters like Marc and others who have shared court filings from the case that they have accessed. These definitely provide interesting insight, and I am grateful to review them for the light they shed on parts of the case. But trying to divine the myriad of provisions that an ultimate settlement agreement might contain is a bridge too far for me without access to all the documents and affidavits that will leverage those provisions.

My sense is that any settlement or, absent that, the court's rulings will be quite favorable to CYDY, but, beyond that, I plan to just wait and see. Hopefully, we won't have long to wait.