Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:42:35 AM
I gather from that that he was being told he couldn't use Rule 144, despite the holding period being expired, because the company was not current. That is my understanding of Rule 144, and is often repeated on these boards (including by some who are known lenders), but I've never actually seen it litigated before (admittedly I haven't looked that hard). It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
For its part, the SEC has this to say regarding the conditions for Rule 144:
My reading of that is that the non-reporting company has to have current financials posted in order for Rule 144 to apply. But, again, that's what the SEC says, and that's not necessarily binding on a court (though would be considered highly persuasive).
Avant Technologies Equipping AI-Managed Data Center with High Performance Computing Systems • AVAI • May 10, 2024 8:00 AM
VAYK Discloses Strategic Conversation on Potential Acquisition of $4 Million Home Service Business • VAYK • May 9, 2024 9:00 AM
Bantec's Howco Awarded $4.19 Million Dollar U.S. Department of Defense Contract • BANT • May 8, 2024 10:00 AM
Element79 Gold Corp Successfully Closes Maverick Springs Option Agreement • ELEM • May 8, 2024 9:05 AM
Kona Gold Beverages, Inc. Achieves April Revenues Exceeding $586,000 • KGKG • May 8, 2024 8:30 AM
Epazz plans to spin off Galaxy Batteries Inc. • EPAZ • May 8, 2024 7:05 AM