Rebel
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.
I am not blaming the SEC or DOJ for anything except for general sloppiness, past and present, and the fact that high ranking officials often let their power and authority go to their heads, ergo, they are superior beings looking down on the little people with disdain and can do whatever the heck they want.
They are very proud of themselves and would not want to lose. There are so many heroes in our government, aren't there? They are such a caring bunch of blowhards, it just warms my heart. lol.
It is still a mystery to me that if Mark and Jason Nielsen were in cahoots, why would Nielson sell over 32 million shares on 4/4/19 and 4/8/19 immediately after the April Fools debacle, which gave him gross proceeds of $1,307,735 (estimate) as opposed to having insider knowledge from Mark that financials were NOT going to happen so he could have sold at $.19 or $.20 for gross proceeds of $6,410,400 (estimate) with that "insider" knowledge.
I mean, why would he deliberately lose about $5,102,665? This tells me that he was as surprised and upset as the rest of us when financials didn't materialize so he dumped shares just like many shareholders did.
Makes no sense. So big deal, he made something like $137K supposedly because of posting positive comments about the Covid 19 test and playing bid games! That's NOTHING compared to the $5.1 million he "lost" in April, 2019.
Mark would have been obligated to file Forms 4 if he had sold or bought any shares, but none were filed. Was he trading shares anyway? Did he sell any shares in March of 2019 while the share price was moving up because of anticipated financials?
I agree with you about the "kickbacks" and many of your other comments. Not only that, but he is accused of "bribery." Did Mark threaten to break someone's kneecaps if they did not order tests from Arrayit? What are they even talking about?
I am looking forward to the trial in March to see if any of these questions are answered.
Can't beat these prices (once again!). Thank you crazy sellers (once again!). :)).
Hi Mike. On 11/17/20, both sides filed a Status Report stating that despite ongoing negotiations the parties have not been able to reach an agreement. On the same date the Judge signed this Order:
"The Parties are ORDERED to file a Joint Pre-Trial Order, updated in light of this matters progress since February 2017, by February 10, 2021. So Ordered (Pretrial Order due by 2/10/2021.) (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 11/18/2020) (js)"
But that case WAS settled and closed as previously discussed.
Average price target $31.25 - "In the last 3 months, 4 ranked analysts set 12-month price targets for SCYX. The average price target among the analysts is $31.25. Analysts compare their price target to the current market price of the stock to determine how much potential upside or downside movement there could be in the stock price.
From Etrade 11/23/20
:))
Wow. Now that's some drama right there! lol. Unless you have read the October Settlement Agreement, you simply do NOT know the terms of said agreement. Every legal matter and settlement is different and nothing is "normal." Plus, 10% is not a huge amount of interest, which is another sign that tells me there might be some sort of payment arrangement.
There are many things still unknown on many levels and to make such doom and gloom predictions seems premature.
Post judgment interest will be 10% per year on $175K, which tells me there must be a note with a payment schedule. The actual settlement agreement reached in October is not available that I can see.
Each party will be responsible to pay their own attorney's fees--a small, but good thing.
I will have to re-check that. I was going by my memory since I had read about it last week.
Pacer. Settled and closed around 11/18/20.
Arrayit to make payments.
The University of Mexico case settled and is closed - $170K. As far as I know, there is NO class action lawsuit. How you can be sure they are no longer able to bill Medicare/Medicaid? Mark was charged, not Arrayit, and he has not been convicted.
While there are certainly many obstacles in the way, I hope your guess is wrong.
That is simply not true,
That appears to be true. Nice catch!
It was disappointing because nothing happened. Glad you are so happy though,
It was a disappointing hearing. I thought it was going to be a preliminary hearing to determine probable cause. Seems to me it was a waste of time for everyone, except that Mark did plead not guilty.
So that's your logic?
Years ago they borrowed money from a Cayman Island company so that MUST mean they have.hidden bank accounts there! Such logic, lol,
1. "Securities fraud," and 2. "Conspiracy to commit Medicare fraud" needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I just re-read the Complaint and the false and/or misleading statements haven't disappeared. The DOJ has a lot to prove, It should be an interesting hearing,
Oh boy. That is just splendid. Thanks Mike.
The most fun would be if the Judge were to dismiss the case due to the many erroneous statements made in the Complaint, but we all know that is unlikely. I guess it depends on the evidence the DOJ presents to the Judge and what Attorney Pickles has to say in Mark's defense. If the DOJ has enough evidence to convince the Judge that Mark is guilty, then a trial date will be set. Last we knew, Mark intended to plead not guilty, but that was several months ago and we have no way of knowing what may have taken place outside of the court between the two sides as far as what was uncovered in discovery or whether any plea deals were discussed.
I am just happy that the preliminary hearing is finally going forward and that "something" is going to happen.
Where in any court document is Mark charged with libel?
lolol. It's right there in the esteemed U.S. Postal Inspector's Affidavit.
So the FDA placed Arrayit's test under "Pre-Emergency Use Authorization" status even though the test did not exist?
How does that make any sense.
It doesn't.
So? Arrayit had a test. Period.
No, the DOJ made no such statement, and under the FDA guidelines, Arrayit was perfectly legal in promoting their test.
Umm. You have to go to the physicians' section. It's there.
Allegations are not facts.
But there IS a Covid-19 test. In fact, it's still on their website when you go to the physicians' section. The instructions for obtaining the sample are still there as well. Also, the FDA has not issued any warning letter to Arrayit as of today.
"Arrayit SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) testing services are available to doctors nationwide."
http://arrayit.com/EReply.html
http://www.arrayit.com/SARS-CoV-2COVID-19TestInstructions.pdf
lolol. Not a fact.
It has nothing to do with me or my feelings. It has to do with the FACTS.
Just pointing out that what you stated as FACT is not a fact.
As the Complaint states, "Schena was soliciting investors to help Arrayit cover its rent."
There is no indication that it actually happened and there was no naming of any investor or investors who may have been solicited. Nielsen would be an obvious choice, I suppose, but that would be a assumption.
So it's not actually a fact as you stated.
It remains to be seen. I hope it's not true.
Where in any of the court documents does it allege that? If it exists, I must have missed it. Where can I find it?
According to the TA, there has been no dilution for several years.
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/ARYC/security
Good grief. I posted information that I thought was interesting about Arrayit and Covid-19. I wasn’t talking about whatever you’re talking about.
Take it or leave it.
Hope so. It's not like the company has nothing.
Multiplexed Detection and Quantification of Human Antibody Response to COVID-19 Infection Using a Plasmon Enhanced Biosensor Platform
EXCERPT:
For use in the COVID-19 detection assay, GC-FP chips were printed with an array of approximately 400 µm diameter spots of target and control antigens/proteins using an ArrayIt SpotBot II microarray printer. All printed proteins/antigens were first diluted to 500 µg/µl in phosphate buffered saline (PBS) and then further diluted 1:1 just prior to printing with GBL protein array printing buffer (Grace Bio-Labs) All proteins/antigens used for printing were kept at -20 °C at 500 µg/µl for long-term storage. Target antigen spots were printed in triplicate, while negative and positive controls were printed in duplicate or triplicate on each GC-FP biosensor chip. After printing, GC-FP biosensor chips were allowed to dry in ambient conditions for a minimum of 30 min, then placed in a desiccant-filled box for long term storage.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.02.20187070v2.full.pdf
Research Report - Geneva, Switzerland October 23, 2020
- A high-throughput microfluidic nano-immunoassay for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in serum or ultra-low volume dried blood sample.
There is therefore a clear need for new technologies to supersede existing methods such as ELISA, 36 CLIA, and LFAs. Novel technologies should be capable of high-throughput, low-reagent consumption, low37 cost per test, high sensitivity and specificity, and be compatible with ultra-low volume whole-blood samples 38 in the low or even sub-microliter range that can be obtained via a simple fingerprick. Biomarker detection 39 using dried whole blood on filter paper or other devices would have tremendous advantages as it can be 40 collected by untrained individuals at home. The samples could then be conveniently shipped by regular 41 mail at ambient temperature to a central laboratory for analysis and test results returned electronically via a 42 mobile app or email.
Microarray spotting 336 25 µL of each sample were loaded into a 384 microwell plate (ArrayIt, MMP384). An MP3 microarray 337 printing pin (Arrayit) was used to spot the samples onto an epoxy-coated glass slide using a QArray2 mi338 croarrayer (Genetix). The presence of Triton X-100 in the serum samples had a significant effect on the spot 339 diameter. To account for this we increased the dimensions of the spotting chamber and set the inking and 340 stamping time to 50 ms and 1 ms, respectively. In addition, it was critical that the ambient humidity was 341 below ~42%, otherwise the spots would become too large and merge together. After spotting, the PDMS chip was aligned on top of the sample spots using a stereo microscope and bonded over night at 40 ? 342 C....
(end of excerpt)
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.07.20208280v2.full.pdf
Huh???