just a squirrel trying to get a nut
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.
looks good I see nothing adverse it's on
just read the May 6 order this is going forward
the May 6 order is about procedure
To efficiently, expeditiously, and economically resolve this
dispute, it is ORDERED as follows:
then it goes on to sets the stage rules of engagement rules of engagement and conduct that the judge would like
at this point ASR Group has might not even have been served
FRAZ FRAZ FRAZ 574K O/S if you haven't already now is a great time >>> https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=162664753
Game on! these are our guys GO FRAZcisco
Evan Stroman
Kozyak Tropin And Throckmorton
Javier Asis Lopez
Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton PA
Jorge Luis Piedra
https://kttlaw.com/
could not sleep BANG! worth the wake up in the middle of the night!
an Idea who's time has finally come oh ya!
I would imagine ASR is the lowest hanging fruit there has to be others
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Sugar_Refining
transactions shipping resale and the other assets that I have mentioned as well
ARISE FRAZ AWAKEN the giant
Increasable PCHM $VOLUME unlike anything ever seen before
Go FRAZ
someone just invested $5M into it I don't think they want to lose...
Institutional investors ?? that is for sure not retail IMO
Go PCHM
Steptoe & Johnson LLP handling 3 Certified Claim's 'Going for the Gusto'
they don't get paid unless they win ...!
I don't think they do charity work in these kinds of lawsuits.
Good news( Payday) for them, is good news for FRAZcisco (a Time and a Place for everything)
EXXON XOM
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163377108
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
TEXAS RANCH
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/38743238/KING_RANCH,_INC_v_EMPRESA_AGROPECUARIA_NUEVITAS_et_al
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
Castanedo Escalon et al v. Trafigura Trading LLC et al
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/38659412/Castanedo_Escalon_et_al_v_Trafigura_Trading_LLC_et_al
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
Steptoe & Johnson LLP New Ruling Serves as Guidepost for Future Claims Involving Cuban Agencies and Instrumentalities
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163633941
Steptoe & Johnson LLP now handling 3 Certified Claim cases they don't get paid unless they win! I don't think they do charity work in these kinds of lawsuits good news( Payday) for them is good news for FRAZcisco (a Time and a Place for everything)
EXXON XOM
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163377108
TEXAS RANCH
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/38743238/KING_RANCH,_INC_v_EMPRESA_AGROPECUARIA_NUEVITAS_et_al
Castanedo Escalon et al v. Trafigura Trading LLC et al
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/38659412/Castanedo_Escalon_et_al_v_Trafigura_Trading_LLC_et_al
Steptoe & Johnson LLP New Ruling Serves as Guidepost for Future Claims Involving Cuban Agencies and Instrumentalities
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163633941
Steptoe & Johnson LLP now handling 3 Certified Claim cases they don't get paid unless they win! I don't think they do charity work in these kinds of lawsuits good news( Payday) for them is good news for FRAZcisco (a Time and a Place for everything)
EXXON XOM
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163377108
TEXAS RANCH
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/38743238/KING_RANCH,_INC_v_EMPRESA_AGROPECUARIA_NUEVITAS_et_al
Castanedo Escalon et al v. Trafigura Trading LLC et al
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/38659412/Castanedo_Escalon_et_al_v_Trafigura_Trading_LLC_et_al
Steptoe & Johnson LLP New Ruling Serves as Guidepost for Future Claims Involving Cuban Agencies and Instrumentalities
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163633941
AAL, ABNB, AMZN, BUD, CAT, CCL, COHN, CVX, FDX, FRAZ, GOOG, JBLU, LUV, NCLH, NFLX, NSRGY, PCHM, PTE, PURA, RCL, RUTH, SAVE, SHERF, TECK, TMUS, TRVG, UAL, XOM SCGLF BNPQF MA V
I almost certain it was you who mentioned the GOLD and Silver
and I could say with most certainty they all did or doing or going to be doing well
Enjoy the week end ...
Go FRAZ PCHM Gold & Silver
Wayne is the man ...
https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/EXXON-MOBIL-CORPORATION-4822/news/Exxon-Mobil-nbsp-New-Ruling-Serves-As-Guidepost-For-Future-Claims-Involving-Cuban-Agencies-And-Ins-33176857/
Exxon Mobil : New Ruling Serves As Guidepost For Future Claims Involving Cuban Agencies And Instrumentalities 05/06/2021 | 06:11am EDT
FRAZ https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=162664753
no there has not! that's the headline right there 'no Selling no one is departing in any significant way'
also there may be lots of liquidity events coming up for non compliant?
as for the compliant might be extra good cause most have been in hiding for so long debts may have expired not collectable so the values of the Shell or companies just for the listing might be worth multiples
I think it would be safe for my most important one incorporated in NJ 1899
NJ / NY Statues of limits after 60years nothing should exist
State Written contracts Promissory notes Open-ended accounts Judgments
New Jersey 6 years 6 years 6 years 20years
New York 6 years 6 years 6 years 20years
King Ranch Of Texas, 67th Largest Certified Claimant
Case 1:21-cv-00594 https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/38743238/KING_RANCH,_INC_v_EMPRESA_AGROPECUARIA_NUEVITAS_et_al
they too are being represented by same as Exxon
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
READ THIS HERE >>> LINK To Complaint whole thing very good read
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/563a4585e4b00d0211e8dd7e/t/6093e8dab30c6f27fca0fd65/1620306139500/merged_77320_-1-1620300797.pdf
Quote:
56. King Ranch has never settled the outstanding certified claim or received any payment from any entity with respect to the principal or interest due on its certified claim.
The Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996
57. Section 302 of the Act provides the following civil remedy:
SEC 302: (a) Civil Remedy.—
(
1) Liability for trafficking.--(A) Except as otherwise provided in this section, any person that, after the end of the 3-month period beginning on the effective date of this title, traffics in property which was confiscated by the Cuban Government on or after January 1, 1959, shall be liable to any United States national who owns the claim to such property for money damages . . . 22 U.S.C. § 6082(a)(1).
58. Section 302 implements a key purpose of the Act, which is to permit U.S. nationals to bring claims against Cuban ministries and state-owned enterprises that engage in unlawful trafficking. For example:
a. Congress found that trafficking in property confiscated from U.S. nationals benefits “the current Cuban Government” and “undermines the foreign policy of the United States.” 22 U.S.C. § 6081(6).
b. Regarding remedies, Congress found that “[t]he international judicial system … lacks fully effective remedies” thereby permitting unjust enrichment “by governments and private entities at the expense of the rightful owners of the property.” Id. § 6081(8).
c. Congress further recognized the U.S. Government’s “obligation to its citizens to provide protection against wrongful confiscations by foreign nations and their citizens, including the provision of private remedies.” Id. § 6081(10).
59. Given these findings, Section 302 of the Act unsurprisingly includes Cuban governmental entities within its scope.
60. Specifically, the definition of a “person” who may be liable for trafficking includes “any person or entity, including any agency or instrumentality of a foreign state” as defined by the FSIA, 28 U.S.C. § 1603(b). See 22 U.S.C. § 6023(1), (11).
61. A person is liable for trafficking in confiscated property under the Act “if that person knowingly and intentionally—
i. sells, transfers, distributes, dispenses, brokers, manages, or otherwise disposes of confiscated property, or purchases, leases, receives, possesses, obtains control of, manages, uses, or otherwise acquires or holds an interest in confiscated property,
ii. engages in a commercial activity using or otherwise benefiting from confiscated property, or
iii. causes, directs, participates in, or profits from, trafficking (as described in clause (i) or (ii)) by another person, or otherwise engages in trafficking (as described in clause (i) or (ii)) through another person, without the authorization of any United States national who holds a claim to the property.” 22 U.S.C. § 6023(13).
62. Since King Ranch has never authorized any person to engage in the activities covered by the Act’s definition of trafficking with respect to the Confiscated Property, Section 302 provides King Ranch with a private right of action against any person—including Cuba’s stateowned enterprises—that has trafficked in the Confiscated Property.
The Act’s Presumption in Favor of Certified Claims
63. Section 302(d) of the Act mandates a presumption in favor of King Ranch’s certified claim:
There shall be a presumption that the amount for
which a person is liable . . . is the amount that is certified
[by the FCSC under the International Claims Settlement Act of
[1949]. 22 U.S.C. § 6082(a)(2) (emphasis added).
64. The Act’s presumption in favor of certified claims extends not only to the amount of liability, but also to the claimant’s ownership and entitlement to treble damages. According to Section 303(a)(1), which deals with the “conclusiveness of certified claims,” in any action
brought under Title III, “the court shall accept as conclusive proof of ownership of an interest in property a certification of a claim to ownership of that interest that has been made by the [FCSC
under Title V of the International Claims Settlement Act of 1949].” 22 U.S.C. § 6083(a)(1) (emphasis added).
65. Under Section 302(a)(3) of the Act, “[a]ny person that traffics in confiscated property for which liability is incurred” shall be liable for treble damages if a U.S. national owns a certified claim to that property. 22 U.S.C. § 6082(a)(3)(A) & (3)(C).
66. Congress intentionally conferred these entitlements on certified claims. The utilization of the certified claim process was viewed as a positive feature of the Act.
The Conference Report from the Committee of Conference states that “courts shall give a strong presumption to the findings of the FCSC.” The Conference report continued: The committee of conference recognizes the importance of a decision by the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission in certifying a claim and, accordingly, believes that no court should dismiss a certification in an action brought under [Title III]. The committee of conference also notes the recognized special expertise of
the FCSC in determining the amount and validity of claims to confiscated
properties overseas. H.R. Rep. 104-468, at 63 (1996).
67. Under the text of the Act and in accordance with the intent of Congress, King Ranch’s certified claim is entitled to (i) a presumption of accuracy with regard to its amount; (ii) be treated as conclusive proof with regard to King Ranch’s ownership of the Confiscated Property;
and (3) a judgment on the claim that includes treble damages.
DEMAND FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that judgment be entered in its favor and against Defendants:
a. Awarding Plaintiff actual damages in the amount of $3,216,084.97;
b. Awarding Plaintiff pre-judgment interest at the rate of 6% per annum from November 1, 1960, as set forth in the FCSC’s award;
c. Awarding Plaintiff treble damages pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 6082(a)(3);
d. Ordering Defendants to pay Plaintiff’s reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred in this action pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 6082(a);
e. Awarding Plaintiff post-judgment interest; and
f. Granting all other relief at law or in equity that the Court deems just and proper.
Date: March 5, 2021 Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ Steven K. Davidson
Steven K. Davidson (DC Bar #407137)
Jared R. Butcher (DC Bar #986287)
STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP
1330 Connecticut Ave NW
Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: 202-429-3000
Facsimile: 202-429-3902
sdavidson@steptoe.com
jbutcher@steptoe.com
Counsel for Plaintiff
as far as companies that never filed BK or articles of dissolution I think even if they don't comply (so they won't be quoted) they will still exists and the part we don't know yet and I think others may be working on this solution it may give rise to an alternative solution to the OTC monopoly I mention before that a blockchain type market would circumvent possibly this new extortion of the little guys!
example my BRER whom I did reach out to and mentioned here
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163212591
why have a service agent if you have nothing to service that agency specifically does compliance
I've reached out to Sugar, had few interactions in the past and recently again with former Secretary but the big guy does not respond sent new outreach again this morning (facts won't change I've already decided all in no matter what) would be nice but not necessary to the end game that's me! ( I believe in what I own)
these are the only two I truly care about the other are not significant enough ( dollar wise & from a preliminary DD stand point) but if they do manage to survive into a pink limited
~1 is they then have ability (if I understand correctly) to dilute
~2 If they are in fact broke where do you think they will get moneys to stay compliant (refer to 1)
also you know as well as I do that it only takes the 1
'You miss 100% of the shots you don't take'
Thoughts
S&P look out ROKU is coming to get you!
3 in a row now / Outlook is strong
4 in a row is just a hop and a skip away IMO
way ahead of schedule on profitability
Steptoe<<~~Files New1 King Ranch Of Texas Certified Claimant
Case 1:21-cv-00594
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/38743238/KING_RANCH,_INC_v_EMPRESA_AGROPECUARIA_NUEVITAS_et_al
UPDATE May 4, 2021 https://www.steptoe.com/en/news-publications/new-ruling-serves-as-guidepost-for-future-claims-involving-cuban-agencies-and-instrumentalities.html?tab=overview
The stars at night are big and bright .... where?
KING RANCH, INC. v. EMPRESA AGROPECUARIA NUEVITAS et al
District Of Columbia District Court
Judge: Randolph D Moss
Case #: 1:21-cv-00594
Nature of Suit 890 Other Statutes - Other Statutory Actions
Cause 28:1331 Fed. Question
Case Filed: Mar 05, 2021
Docket
Parties (10)
Last checked: Monday Apr 19, 2021 6:10 AM EDT
Defendant
EMPRESA AGROPECUARIA NUEVITAS
Defendant
EMPRESA CUBANA EXPORTADORA DE ALIMENTOS Y PRODUCTOS VARIOS
Defendant
EMPRESA EXTRAHOTELERA PALMARES, S.A.
Defendant
EMPRESA FORESTAL INTEGRAL DE CAMAGUEY
Defendant
GRUPO EMPRESARIAL AGROFORESTAL
Defendant
GRUPO EMPRESARIAL VIAJES CUBA
Defendant
GRUPO INTERNACIONAL DE TUROPERADORES Y AGENCIAS DE VIAJES HAVANATUR S.A. (HAVANATUR CUBA)
Defendant
HAVANATUR, S.A. (PANAMA)
Defendant
GRUPO EMPRESARIAL AGRICOLA
Plaintiff
KING RANCH, INC.
Represented By
Steven K. Davidson
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
contact info
(2) I did mention it but you or slim did not comment. I've been trying to understand what the new minimum requirements are and if any of the sub zero's I have will comply ? if they do not comply they will be reduced to sell only no new orders will be taken! (may have to double down on the DD and reach out to the more worth while ones) thing is we may be sitting on something substantial but a more unethical actor could delay any filings and gather up the sell side (and if I can dream that up then some will do it especially if there is a financial gain FWIW)
first mentioned here~~> https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163288730
please do share your thoughts on this TY
(1) yes the manatee
UPDATE May 4, 2021 https://www.steptoe.com/en/news-publications/new-ruling-serves-as-guidepost-for-future-claims-involving-cuban-agencies-and-instrumentalities.html?tab=overview
Implications of this are huge for Corporate Certified Claim holders making Cuban owned entities ( and their foreign accomplices) collectible defendants' I personally feel this broadened the horizon exponentially ....
should be on notice: Conde Rum( also include anyone marketing or distributing transporting or transacting ) BUD NSRGY SCGLF BNPQF
boy did I miss read your post 'I saw FDA not FRA.' took it too literal
thinking you saw FDA as a cash burn and in turn not putting enough money to work cause they are sitting on a significant amount (Forward Rate Agreements). ok that aside
your Magnusum post and how all of the tickers where intertwined and could be marketed as a package deal made me think about sugar and the same guy controls both so I grabbed just a few(only a few) cause I believe it to be not as attractive not so much in terms of O/S 1.2M but mostly about Preferred outstanding unknown factor if/how the preferred shares play into it (could parabole' anyhow as decimal place gets added to big sugar.)...
next item on the agenda silver (I have some AG would like to add others dividend payers like AEM or NEM ) and picked up some of the Magnusum with a potential of Sprott very little (H pinkstop Mr. Fibonacci suggests there exists a price of $3-5 at some point and time don't know?) for that second parabolic move that turns xbaggers into xxxbaggers no biggie(purely speculation small) I normally don't buy much in mining spec as for geology same for FDA pending(too much Science). For the most part I like things that I can easily wrap my head around like math
recently I've been moving more funds into cash, crap! gonna pay taxes, but over all it's important to have them available for when new opportunities arise
still working on the lowest cap strategy but back of my mind has me thinking about the new Rule goes into affect in 5 months and the potentially shortened life span of some of the tickers there is very little DD to support survivability in a few of them (your thoughts if any would be appreciated)...
they sure are loading it up is it for the yield, a buyout, uplisting, growth or other? please check one lol
cause you didn't see FRA. and it might be more than I estimated for what you did see
White heat is screaming in the jungle
Complete the motion if you stumble
Go ask the dust for any answers
Come back strong with 50 belly dancers
The world I love
The tears I drop
To be part of
The wave can't stop
Ever wonder if it's all for you
The world I love
The trains I hop
To be part of
The wave can't stop
Come and tell me when it's time to
grabbed a few on your 'not a recommendation
also what you said about the ones that are tied in got me to thinking about my favorite stock and her not so pretty sister also just a few
'Notional value is a term often used to value the underlying asset in a derivatives trade. It can be the total value of a position, how much value a position controls'
Fun to say 'lucky' but alot of hard work and preparedness goes into it can you imagine the guy who researches and reads filings of over 10,000 companies knowing 99.9999% will be total crap garbage 'No Accidents' DD//
LMLYP 'Kicked A Hole Right In The Sky'
FRAZ PCHM G/S
FRAZ Exhibit A' Sweet' Notional Value<<~~
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163377108
Joining-DD//ots Very~Important-excerpt:
Exxon Case<<~~ Page 11 https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=162999487
working on a solution??
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=163076142
AM@NCIO Las Tun@s Port of Guay@bal
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=162975134
RECAP: FRAZ 574K O/S >>~Nuf`Said~>>Sweet<<
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=162664753
Companies are chronically overlooked by Wall Street. Wall Street coverage is positively correlated to a company's market capitalization, leaving smaller-cap stocks with less coverage and greater opportunity for mispricing. Institutional investors often spend little effort researching micro-cap and small-cap opportunities because of their limited impact on major indices. This lack of coverage allows disciplined Investors to buy stocks that trade for less than their intrinsic value.
DEET
the line reads we 'intend to comply' and they are looking at the cost associated with a 'pink limited' so they have till Sept.
from the SEC
what's got your 'GOAT Now ....?
New Running Total $3M+ Support
Go PCHM sasaFRAZtastic
wonder if ELON tweets First NFT from space brought to you by SpaceX
TSLA WKEY
U.S. Certified Corporate Claims are the strongest cases going forward. Then there is the question of what constitutes "trafficking" the way I read the ACT is you cannot drink from 2 Cups either your doing business in the U.S or your not ...
so for example: if your using sugar from the fields and selling the cookies in Europe but you have branches in the U.S you are liable if your booking trips to a hotel or processing payments(Facilitator to the trafficking) that was on a certified claimants property then you are liable I believe this was the intent of congress being one step removed does not make you immune and I think we will start to see more light coming from Appellate courts decisions
https://practiceguides.chambers.com/practice-guides/litigation-2021/cuba/trends-and-developments
https://www.akerman.com/en/perspectives/cuba-trends-and-developments-2021.html
This article was originally published by Chambers and Partners’ Litigation 2021 Guide on December 4, 2020.
so dated but I wanted to add it here for quick reference
awaiting these outcomes ....
Appellate rulings in the cases already on appeal, and on any additional early dismissals, will do much to shape the future paths and outcomes of these cases.
MARCH 2021 https://www.jonesday.com/en/insights/2021/03/jones-day-talks--helmsburton-cases-move-through-courts-and-the-state-of-uscuba-relations
most current discussion looking forward to the next updates as these cases progress through the courts so far Certified corporate Claims are the strongest cases
Forward rate agreements
Forward rate agreements (FRA) are over-the-counter contracts between parties that determine the rate of interest to be paid on an agreed-upon date in the future. The notional amount is not exchanged, but rather a cash amount based on the rate differentials and the notional value of the contract. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fra.asp#:~:text=Key%20Takeaways-,Forward%20rate%20agreements%20(FRA)%20are%20over%2Dthe%2Dcounter,notional%20value%20of%20the%20contract.
on the other hand the FDA approval that Joe mentioned I don't think sounded like something overly complicated and I would imagine gets approved easily and without any kind of major spend
Go FRAZ PCHM G/S
you think Joe ever took me up on this ?
very peculiar trade @$8.375 size 50 shares bid was $4.01 ask was $6.75 but the trade took place much higher any thoughts ...?
trade #5 https://ih.advfn.com/stock-market/USOTC/francisco-industries-pk-FRAZ/trades
Go FRAZ PCHM G/S
FRAZ has the Smartest Investors on IHUB
I've said it before I'll say it again
'Epic' Gold and Silver on the move literally and figuratively
your research notes over the years have been invaluable
I dig trenches of dirt it takes a geologist to confirm the quality of the find
scratch that replace with $2.5M Support
Go PCHM sasaFRAZtastic