Medical Marijuana Inc (MJNA)

[Det_Robert_Thorne]

Agreed. That's why the second post.

Realized that it was "shareholder vs. shareholder" just after the editing period expired, so added the second post noting that.

Yes, it's too bad that the Clark County courts don't provide the ability to download the complaints.

Mik-Nik Trust is Michael and Nicolle Mona, likely bro and sis, and was the first reported buyer of the $1 restricted share offering.

Had a thought:

Considering the shareholder vs. shareholder aspect, and that the Monas, Mackay and Roen control a majority of the shares, maybe this is a fight over the reporting of share ownership or the selling of shares.

1) Share Reporting (less probable)

MJNA hasn't properly reported its ownership of CANV shares as the number of shares it held increased. In early 2013, Phytosphere filed as owning 1M shares, and MJNA filed as holding 720K shares, but no further filings were made as more shares were paid to MJNA and its ownership of CANV shares increased.

Perhaps, with the SEC cracking down, Roen, as a way of protecting its investment in CANV, is suing MJNA to get it to file, but for some reason MJNA wants to keep it secret.

But under this scenario, why would MJNA countersue?


2) Share selling (higher probability)

Since MJNA began to receive restricted shares from CannaVest for the Phytosphere deal in December, 2012 (or early Jan, 2013,) by Jan, 2014, a certain number of shares would be eligible to become unrestricted. Unfortunately, at that time, CANV was selling the $1 restricted shares.

Maybe MJNA wanted to sell some of its newly unrestricted shares to raise cash, but perhaps it had some kind of agreement with Roen and the Monas to not sell shares until after all the $1 restricted shares were sold, or those new restricted shares themselves were eligible to become unrestricted, as a way of protecting those new investors, including the Mik-Nik Trust.

What if MJNA decided to sell a few hundred (or thousand) shares anyway but didn't report the sale on EDGAR (just as they hadn't reported ownership). CANV, through the transfer agent, would know about the sale, and so of course, Mona and Mackay would have heard of it.

Mackay (as Roen Ventures) then sues MJNA to stop them from selling more shares, and eventually, MJNA countersues the big shareholders for trying to restrain it from selling shares that it should be legally able to sell.


Do either of these two scenarios make sense?