InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 223
Posts 9492
Boards Moderated 4
Alias Born 09/16/2010

Re: MONEYMADE post# 30130

Wednesday, 07/23/2014 10:36:51 AM

Wednesday, July 23, 2014 10:36:51 AM

Post# of 33394
And what were those milestones?? Name them....

MoneyMades Post

CONSPIRING???? CIRC DIDN'T DO A DAMM THING FOR 5YRS! ROFL....

NOT ONCE DID THEY MEET THE REQUIRED MILESTONES TO MAINTAIN DISTRIBUTORSHIP!



Was the contract rewritten?? If so, how many times? Did the milestones change per agreements as stated in any new contracts? What was more important to both main parties involved?? Was it to sell the drink or build distribution channels? Why did Jimmy E feel the need to get involved with Redi? Did PB executive state in a deposition that Jimmy was a liar and they wanted to remain with Cirtran? How many judges have to toss out this bogus case ( of milestones weren't met) in order for you to get off that moot point. If milestones were met or not isn't IMO what is going to determine the final outcome. At this point milestones don't matter IMO if they did CIRC wouldn't be 8-0.

What about this is hard to understand?? How do you interpret DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE?

On Monday, the Honorable Kathleen M. Pantle dismissed with prejudice an amended third-party complaint filed by Playboy against CirTran Corporation, its President Iehab J. Hawatmeh, and fellow board member Fadi Nora. The ruling follows an earlier order issued by Judge Pantle in January, 2014, which dismissed Playboy’s original third-party complaint for failure to plead sufficient facts to state a claim against these parties under Illinois law. At that time, Judge Pantle allowed Playboy to file the now-dismissed amended complaint.



http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=62428934

Pls give the board you're insight on the above ruling. Do you think milestones being met is where things still are in this case??