Janice... Yesterday's settlement agreement is labled as DISPOSITION, meaning the court's final determination of it. In other words, the judge accepted the agreement.
As I said, that settlement is a "portion" of the Plaintiff's (i.e. BCIT) lawsuit/settlement agreement. ----- We will hear about Notice of pendency and proposed settlement of actions sooner or later.
After "this", this case will be dismissed.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You keep saying that "the request for permission to issue new shares wasn't part of
the settlement agreement."
You said that the judge hasn't yet addressed the issuance of new Common shares.
How did you know this???
Could you share YOUR information about yesterday's Joint Application for hearing seeking Approval of Settlement Agreement?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My understanding is based on the PUBLIC documents and Mr. Megas' email. The following are (1)the Court document and (2)the 10-QSB.
(1) Upon consideration of the joint application for hearing seeking APPROVAL of Settlement Agreement filed by plaintiff, BCIT, Capital Growth Financial, LLC, and JH Darbie & Co.Inc, the court finds that said application should be granted.
At such hearing, the court will consider the fairness of the proposed "issuance of new shares of common stock of BCIT, in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement, pursuant to Section 3(a) (10) of the Securities Act of 1933 (as amended). Such shares would be exempt from registration under the 1933 Act.
It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the Application is hereby granted. It is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the hearing on the APPROVAL of the Settlement Agreement as set for in the application be set for and heard on January 6, 2006, at 1:30 pm before this court.
The court further approves the proposed Notice of Pendency and proposed Settlement of Actions attached as Exhibit B to the application which sets forth the hearing date for aapproval of the settlement aggrement, and further approves the means and methods of giving notice as set forth in the applicatio.
(Note that we are now waiting for the event of the LAST paragraph. If they are "disposed", then, this CASE is dismissed. ----- Yesterday's Approval of the Settlement Aggrement was about the "second pagagraph" which you have denied.) Again, please tell us your information about "the
Joint Application for Hearing Seeking Approval Settlement Agreement."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) The recent 10-QSB states that there are approximately 243,842,000 unauthorized Common shares issued by the defendants. The company filed the lawsuit to seek the RETURN of the fraudulentl issued common stock shares AND the defendants' receipt of sale proceeds from the sale of the shares. ----- This Form was filed on December 23, 2005.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That SEC filing clearly states about 244 million unauthorized, fraudulent shares, and the company wants them to return the 244 million shares.
All of a sudden, today I read 500 million shares. Once bcit gets new GOOD shares through a court, this company can issue as many shares as they want without any further approval of the judge or the sec. Why would they request the judge to issue more shares than the fraudulent shares reported in the sec filing???
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Poe is responsible for 215,863,000 fraudelent shares. In other words, he did not do his homework. He was a branch manager of CGF in "Oklahoma city" when the defendants sent the fraudulent certificates to his branch. According the court petition, the false certificates were neither registered under applicable Federal or Oklahoma Securities laws nor exempt from registration. The petition # 1 states that the plaintiff's claims for relief are based on the defendants' VIOLATIONS of the Oklahoma Uniform Securities Act of 2004. So the judge knows that the defendants VIOLATED the laws of his state.
The Petition # 11: After depositing, the false certificates into their accounts at CGF, the defendants SEPECIFICALLY instructed Joe Poe to cause the Common stock represented by the false certificates to be sold in the public market.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My family is going out for dinner now. Please share your information about the settlement. I will read it tomorrow. Thanks...
