Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Impartial Arbitration decision seems pretty clear cut. This has nothing to do with anything except the misjudgments of Nader and the Bod. Whether Pestell did or did not do a good job is irrelevant, a contract, even one you dislike, must be adhered to or suffer the consequences.
Misiu, below was posted on YMB, as a physician this should really give you great concern about Nader Pourhassan's judgement.
An excerpt from the Pestell vs CytoDyn lawsuit filed in August 2019:
64. Although Dr. Pestell and the CEO initially maintained a cordial working relationship, their relationship rapidly deteriorated following Dr. Pestell’s objections in late June 2019 to the CEO concerning an investigational new drug application (“IND”) and protocol to be submitted to the FDA despite the fact that Dr. Pestell, as the CMO, and another expert had determined that the protocol, as then drafted, was not safe for the study subjects.
65. Specifically, on June 20, 2019, the CEO, who has no medical training, demanded that the clinical trial office at Amarex Clinical Research LLC (“Amarex”) “submit the IND and protocol that you had made for colon cancer for submission to the FDA by tomorrow and let [Professor] John [Marshall, Consultant to CytoDyn] know that we are not waiting for him any longer.”
66. Dr. Pestell pushed back on the CEO’s attempts to rush the submission because, the week prior, on June 12, 2019, Dr. Pestell had determined that the protocol was unsafe because it would likely lead to a higher incidence of side effects, placing patients at unnecessary risk. For those reasons, Dr. Pestell and Professor Marshall, a colon cancer subject matter expert who had previously worked with Dr. Pestell from 2002 to 2005 and is currently a consultant to CytoDyn, agreed that changes should be made to the protocol.
67. Dr. Pestell, Professor Marshall, and Amarex recommended a safer and more efficacious revised protocol, which adjusted the dose and timing of the chemotherapeutic agent to be provided to patients. The initial draft study proposed a daily 160 mg starting dose of regorafenib, plus weekly subcutaneous administration of leronlimab. However, regorafenib can have severe side effects at that starting dosage, which research has shown are lessened by starting with a lower dose, which is then gradually escalated. The protocol revision endorsed by Dr. Pestell, Professor Marshall, and Amarex accordingly recommended a dose escalation of 80, 120, and 160 mg of regorafenib, in combination with the administration of leronlimab.
68. Despite this recommendation from experts in the field, and despite Dr. Pestell’s authority for leading and implementing the Company’s clinical programs, the CEO instead proposed submitting the original protocol with Dr. Pestell’s name removed. This interference with Dr. Pestell’s authority and performance of his duties constituted a breach of Section 2.2 of the Employment Agreement.
69. Ultimately, Amarex declined to submit the original protocol, and only then did the CEO relent and follow Dr. Pestell’s recommendation.
70. Over the course of the following weeks, however, the CEO embarked on an effort to retaliate against Dr. Pestell by obstructing his ability to carry out his responsibilities, relieving him of his authority over various matters, and ultimately leading the effort to terminate his employment.
Not honoring the contract was the reason for the arbitration decision. That is on Nader and the current BOD for thinking they could get away with it. Terrible decision, does not matter whether they liked the contract or not or who recommended or negotiated it.
Yes, poor decisions occur, but when they are chronic, I would think stockholders would question whether they had the right team in place.
I don't take things personally, but I agree they don't like seeing the 8-K posted in their "space". That said, its common to want to shoot the messenger.
Link to 8-K
https://sec.report/Document/0001193125-21-211981/0001193125-21-211981.txt
Looks like poor judgement not to release those shares to Prostagene because damages and fees will cost the company $7.6MM. Whether you are for or against current management, that hurts.
I believe the Proxy materials must be filed no later than 10 days prior to the Annual Meeting, but I am not 100% on that.
Just to be clear, neither the company's BoD candidates, whoever they may be, nor the candidates already nominated by the 13D nominating group, can present their case in any depth or detail until the respective Proxy Statements are approved by the S.E.C. All conflicts of interests, current and future, must be disclosed when presentations are eventually made to stockholders. Thus far, we only have one slate of nominees waiting on S.E.C. sanction, so it is amazing that so many people have already made up their minds without the benefit of knowing who all the candidates will be. I have learned never to assume anything and it would not shock me to learn one or more of the current CYDY directors will not be on the Proxy card. I am looking forward to learning what all candidates have to say, particularly those I have never heard speak or read.
IMO, in this age of "google search", if candidates are not transparent, the electorate will eventually sniff the BS and embrace those who are mindful of the truth. I do get the impression, that 90% of people who post on MBs, have dug their heels in so hard in favor of one point of view or another, that even the most compelling facts and/or well reasoned presentations have no impact on how they will vote. It reminds me of the phenomena of "cognitive dissonance", where no matter the reality, people can't allow themselves to see it because it is incompatible with long held or existing attitudes and opinions. I wish us all discernment and wisdom to make the right decision when we vote, because the fate of Leronlimab and the patients it can help, hangs in the balance.
"Press releases stopped..." what is the implication or connection with the 13d group?
Thanks for posting this email message. Reading between the lines it appears that The Advancing Leronlimab Website is limited, as to the information it can share, before S.E.C approval of the Proxy Filing. That may explain why they have not released more specific plan details and/or strategies to achieve FDA LL approval. Of course, today they published verbatim a copy of the 13 D Monitoring Group Report. I have never heard of the Monitoring Group, but I think their goal is to encourage and support stockholder activism.
Hog Killer, without FDA Approval, Leronlimab will be unavailable to patients and CytoDyn will not achieve revenue. The FDA is not going anywhere, so whoever runs the company needs to fix whatever is wrong with the FDA relationship. I think the key is gaining their acceptance of the MOA in HIV maintenance therapy.
3X Charm, it is a shame that unfounded rumors, scare tactics, and near hysterical messages seem to be dominating the "conversation". I do try to reach out to shareholders who have not made up their minds about how to vote because I think careful analysis and facts matter to them.
SammieGo, I take that as a no vote for the nominees mentioned in your post. If you are correct, Pourhassan and Kelly will have no problem winning. Of course, we do not know who the other three candidates will be, which I think might be important for shareholders to know.
Jimmy, I do agree that a democratic process is needed to select the BODs. In fact, the process is mandated by the company Bylaws. Now that a new slate of candidates has been put forth, we should be hearing from the current Board as to who their candidates will be.
BTW, nobody on any of the MBs or Social Media Platforms has provided documentation and/or validation of the harsh and critical assessments of the intentions of the candidates nominated by the 13D Nominating Group. As in any election, the candidates themselves will have to make the case to garner votes. Shareholders can vote for individuals or the entire slate, as they choose. Let's get the best five people on the BODs who can set in motion a credible pathway to Leronlimab's FDA Approval for HIV and Cancer. When that Approval is received, everything should fall in place for all stakeholders. I am looking forward to learning more about each candidate on both sides.
Do you have a source for your statement "B.Paterson wanted Nader to buy his company for an unreasonable price". I have read that before, but to date nobody has provided anything to validate its accuracy or an account of the negotiations one would assume took place. As far as I know, Nader has not made any public statements about it, nor has the subject been mentioned in any SEC Filing. Until you can provide documentation, you are spreading a rumor.
Actually, it is verbatim what is in the SEC Filing. If you read the Filing on the SEC website you will see that there are screenshots of the Advancing Leronlimab pages. It is just more convenient to visit
https://www.advancingll.com/ , but regardless, it is all public information.
The plan is to repair the fractured relationship with the FDA. That's it, the whole ball game is FDA Approval, everything else is noise. Current management has failed to submit an acceptable BLA and I believe that when shareholders hear from Dr. Patterson, they will have a clearer picture of the situation. IMO, once the new BOD is in place and has access to the RTF Letter a management team will be assembled to address the FDA's reasons for the RTF. Until access to the RTF letter is made available all we have are speculations as to Leronlimab's prospects of Approval.
Not true. Nothing to do with IncellDx. The photo is a stock image.
ombowstring, you can find the SEC Filings at the following link.
https://www.advancingll.com/
"And the 13D submissive wanna hand back control to Tony? Insane."
That would be insane if it were true, but it is not going to happen, because only an elected BOD can do that! Tony has the right, as all shareholders do, to express his opinion, but that's it. The debate IMO, now should shift to the BOD Candidates, not the 13D Shareholders who are not running for election. For better or worse the Candidates represent themselves and I believe strongly it will be for the better.
Big question, will the FDA ever approve Leronlimab with Nader Pourhassan as CytoDyn CEO?
So far the answer is no and judging by a recent FDA public statement, it looks even more unlikely than when the company received the RTF (Refusal To File) Letter from the FDA last year. Shareholders have not been able to learn for themselves what the RTF contained, as Pourhassan has stated at least three different reasons for FDA objections, but never released the actual contents of the letter during a CC or PR. That is very concerning. Make no mistake without FDA Approval Leronlimab is dead in the water and so is CytoDyn. It does not matter what Pourhassan says, and he has told many stories and made many statements, always with the caveat "hopefully" which I suppose is a CYA strategy to protect his being legally accountable.
I just want Leronlimab to have a shot at Approval. If that happens we're gold. Do I think Dr. Patterson would increase the odds of that happening? Absolutely, so he has my vote. As for the rest of the slate, while not perfect, they are far more qualified than the current Board, especially Melissa Yeager and Paul Rosenbaum.
BTW, the company has not released who their nominees will be because I suspect the two truly independent Directors. either won't be asked or will refuse to run because of the liabilities associated with recent litigation and the atmosphere created by the CEO. I don't think Pourhassan appreciated them forcing him to give back a significant percentage of his ill gotten stock booty and he may drop them from the Proxy Ticket.
You could be right about Gilead's intention, no knowledge or opinion on the matter. Beatty was trading CYDY stock, so what? He is not a nominee and at this point his trading strategy is irrelevant. Personally, I appreciated and enjoyed Patterson's contribution on videos and calls. In fact, I think his voice was the most important factor in attracting new shareholders to CYDY. I don't have first hand knowledge of what went down with the possibility of Cytodyn acquiring Incelldx. I'd like to hear Patterson's and Pourhassan's accounts. There are always two sides as to why transactions bomb out.
The 13D Group's purpose was to nominate Directors. The focus now shifts to the those standing for election. IMO shareholders should deep dive into the Board nominees backgrounds and decide if they are a better choice than those presented by the company. BTW, the company has not yet let shareholders know who their proposed Directors will be.
Fair point regarding the "two guys", I want to hear their take on what happened. Last I noticed, Gilead was a pretty darn successful company with lots of regulatory success. So I don't understand why being an ex Gilead employee (VP, Regulatory Affairs) is a bad thing.
I assume you are referring to Dr. Patterson, who is anything but a fame seeker. Sometimes fame does find extraordinary people, so will leave it at that. Which Director Nominee was flipping CYDY stock? BTW, buying and selling stock, assuming its profitable seems legit. Calling it flipping to make it sound bad seems naive.
I think the Patent issues must be settled by the parties involved for the benefit of all stakeholders. My non-legal take is that each Patent could be construed as to block the potential value of the other. Regardless of the outcome of the Proxy Battle, each side should come to the table and negotiate a fair settlement. Patent litigation costs would be quite expensive and neither side should want to go there.
Other then NP and SK, who I assume will run, can anyone confirm whether the the other three Directors will stand for reelection. If they do not, I think finding quality replacements is going to be a challenge given all the litigation and uncertainty swirling around the company.
Link to SEC Filing regarding BOD Candidates:
https://d1io3yog0oux5.cloudfront.net/sec/0001104659-21-088338/0001104659-21-088338.pdf
Bluefish, not guessing. The nomination process is mandated by the corporate bylaws which must be adhered to by all “slates” and the 13D folks are no exception.
Shareholders will have plenty of time before voting to decide.
Until the Lawsuits are settled there will not be an "uplist". Additionally, the company will have to present a truly independent BOD to correct and prevent corporate governance shortcomings of the past.
It’s about the qualifications of the BOD candidates that should matter when voting.
Once we know who is actually running we shareholders will decide the future of the company. The 13D group will not control the BODs. Based on SK’s comment, it appears not all of the current Directors are standing for re-election. Change is coming, looking forward to learning who the nominees will be. I believe the window for Nominations closes 60 days prior to the Annual Meeting.
I thought Nader seemed sad and defeated. Dr. Recknor was the only one on the call that had anything credible to say.
I believe that the 13D Slate of Director Candidates will be released before July 2nd. I would be shocked if Carocciolo was one of them. BTW, I would not expect a CEO to be designated until such time as the new Board, if elected, conducts an exhaustive executive search. Shareholders will vote based on the individual qualifications of each Director candidate and how they believe that each would contribute to decisions regarding the best interests of all stakeholders.
Thanks, hopefully, the patent holders will put their differences aside and work something out for the benefit of all stakeholders. I think without that happening, it will be tough sledding for all.
What is your take regarding the "patent" issue? I know both Cytodyn and Incelldx hold patents, why is there a conflict?
The value of any company, Incelldx included, is whatever a buyer will pay. While I was not a party to the negotiations between Cytodyn and Incelldx, it probably went something like this:
Bruce, we're interested in purchasing Incelldx, can you give us a number you'd be happy with?
Okay Nader, I have engaged a respected Business Valuation Firm and their analysis says that Incelldx is worth $XXXXXX$. Here is their report, financials, and business plan for your DD.
Now, my question is, was there a counter offer? Or, any response whatsoever? Anyone know?
I think this is an important topic, because it seems Patterson's collaboration with Cytodyn ended around the time these "non-negotiations" ended. IMHO, LL's pathway to approval runs through Bruce Patterson or another medical scientist of his stature.
You are so wrong about Dr. Bruce Patterson. Aside from being a world class virologist, he is a soft spoken, and humble person. The reasons why the CYDY purchase of Incelldx never happened had more to do with Dr. Pourhassan’s insecurity and ego, as well as his unwillingness to engage in productive negotiations.
Ambersavage, I believe that Court document you referenced was the Plaintiff's complaint filed against Cytodyn. I think it is an assertion which may be an assumption based on faulty information. BTW, the S.E.C Filing was done by Cytodyn, not Patterson.
Unless you have recent confirmation of the 400k share award from Cytodyn, you may want to ask Cytodyn to document that Patterson actually received the 400k shares per their S.E.C. Filing. If he did, I yield to your DD, if not, you owe a retraction. It is up to you to prove your original statements. Nevertheless, the truth will eventually show itself.
As far as I know, Patterson never received the 400k shares which were promised, so there is nothing to "claw back". The CYDY filing which indicated that he owned the 400k shares jumped the gun and was incorrect. If I am wrong about that, please document your assertion.
Sometimes reality is stranger than fiction. The Cytodyn story is one of those cases. BTW, Patterson has been very restrained in his comments about any grievances he may have with CYDY. Eventually, it will all be worked out, but will take some time.
Hopefully, the true RO story will soon be known.