pereg, I see.
Part (i) kind of looks logical. I figure some of the new RONIN candidates where not vetted yet and if a committee must do that that candidate should not be present would he be on that committee.
The second part kind of tell me that PPHM might have had some doubt about the 'no control over candidates' part and hence under a 'if this is true then you would agree that those candidates may be recused for the treatment of ANY RONIN induced matters".
But RONIN clearly signed the agreement and that included that stipulation so I'dd rather see that as good news.
Then again notice the words "with respect to the company", "transaction between the Company.." and another article says that this agreement is only valid UNLESS RONIN breaches it. If RONIN would do that, and I have no reason at this moment to believe RONIN would, then it is normal that the RONIN candidates could not be part of the companies defence because at that moment PPHM would put in doubt their neutrality.
So, not sure what your thinking was related to this, the reason you refer to this specific paragraph, but unless I mis-understand all this it looks rather as RONIN being at will to prove they are not up to something and if they would then accept consequences.
But AGAIN PPHM makes a deal here about the companies board and committee WITH A SINGLE SHAREHOLDER group (Ronin/SW about 10%) and IGNORES ALL the other shareholders.
That is actually more of a concern to me IN PRINCIPLE. Because as I said I am quite pleased with this settlement, at that most I had to give up CEO King as a BoD member but they otherwise gave me my prefered BoD.
Still open and interested to try to understand what you were trying to say.
AIMO
Peregrine Pharmaceuticals the Microsoft of Biotechnology! All In My Opinion. I am not advising anything, nor accusing anyone.
