That type of language is standard in SEC subpoenas
Post# of 148277
(Total Views: 478)
Posted On: 01/25/2022 2:21:17 PM
That type of language is standard in SEC subpoenas. So Cytodyn likely just took it from a subpoena and included it in their filings. You can see it in endnote 2 of this Harvard Law article:
As the SEC states in the standard disclosures contained in its subpoenas: “This investigation is a non-public, fact-finding inquiry. We are trying to determine whether there have been any violations of the federal securities laws. The investigation and the subpoena do not mean that we have concluded that you or anyone else has broken the law. Also, the investigation does not mean that we have a negative opinion of any person, entity or security.”
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2016/04/09/do...stigation/
Reading the article, it's unclear to me whether Cytodyn was compelled to include info about the investigations in their filings.
Anyway, the language is just boilerplate and surely offers no insight into the chances of any investigation winding up with an enforcement or just fizzling out.
As the SEC states in the standard disclosures contained in its subpoenas: “This investigation is a non-public, fact-finding inquiry. We are trying to determine whether there have been any violations of the federal securities laws. The investigation and the subpoena do not mean that we have concluded that you or anyone else has broken the law. Also, the investigation does not mean that we have a negative opinion of any person, entity or security.”
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2016/04/09/do...stigation/
Reading the article, it's unclear to me whether Cytodyn was compelled to include info about the investigations in their filings.
Anyway, the language is just boilerplate and surely offers no insight into the chances of any investigation winding up with an enforcement or just fizzling out.
(1)
(0)CytoDyn Inc (CYDY) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼