I am not doing a lot. I am retired. Doing a bit of share trading and own a bit of real estate.
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.
Just spent several hours reading over the couple months posts leading into the BK. Fascinating to say the least.
Here is one post that I copied from that time, and it strikes me how little things have changed. Substitute the IG4 for the ELF and the story is much the same now as it was during the time mentioned in the post.
Well, could be that STEWART after so many years feels some OWNERSHIP of CDEX. But the Doctor now on the BOD, had to be easily led. Could be that there is kinship there, I don't know.
ANYWAY, it is their money. I a gonna quit wondering about it and just accept that despite all logic and history, them OP Boys actually believe that there could be something there.. NOT BLOODY LIKELY AT ALL...BUT their money and their belief. INCREDIBLE!!!
I understand that there are those with heavy money, at least to them, invested here and that they understandably would welcome CDEX success.
But it has long become obvious that it will not happen, and certainly does not merit throwing more good into it. There is not enough trading action to attract flippers or day traders.
So, again, why bother?
SOAPY or not, I am still reluctant to declare that the OP GANG is stupid. STEWART, at least, has been involved with CDEX probably since the beginning When HARRIS started selling shares out of his auto trunk. Selling shares has been the only successful "product" in all that time.
Since the share selling bidness has dropped way down to nothing or close to it, and no other product is selling to amount to a hill of beans, the question is WHY BOTHER with funding the dead mackerel that CDEX has become??
ANY IDEAS ANYONE??
LESSEE JB became PUTATIVE CEO in 2010. Before the year was out, Him and POTETTE IMAGINERD up the IG4. Here it is over three + years later. And sold NARY A ONE. I say they will not ever sell one. Never. But then, I also think nobody ever really EXPECTED them to sell even one.
Nobody.. Just hoping to sell some more shares.
Even if he was a triple PHd I would not believe him anyway. He is a proven liar.
CDEX has a great one holding the CEO JOB... !!!!!!!Liar, that is.
I read it as all are welcome. Gotta pay a fee. Maybe I read it wrong??
EVEN MORE PROOF, IF ANY WAS NEEDED, that JB lied to the court.
Does the court give a damn?? NOPE, that Judge retired
AFTER ALL, isn't JB a co-inventor of the IG4??
STREETIE can maybe relay to us his knowledge of the status of the beta testing?? IMAGINARY beta testing that is. All he would need is imagination. If has not enough, perhaps he can consult with that GREAT IMAGINEER DOCTOR WADE?? Or that knowledgeable CEO and grad of nothing except BK technique JB??
Fail to see any mention of POTEET except that you ALLEGE that he will attend..along with several hundred others. THAT small mention is just enough to allow the posts re telescopes to survive. BARELY.
By JUNEBUG!! You are SO right!! But the volume is notsa hot today. Wonder wha hoppen yesterday??
Big Noise!! But the SP wound up back where it started from. TOO BAD!!
Nothing to base any jubilation on JOHN...Not yet, anyway.
Sells outnumbered the buys.
Yes I also imagine that very thing..LOL!!
JR, when next you chat with Pennstreet, ask him when he is gonna come up with more funds for CDEX.
After a bit of inquiry I have learned that unless the patent is further pursued after the first rejection within six months, it is considered abandoned.
But to further pursue, money is required after the first three months. Those three months have passed. It might take as much as $5 K to take it further.
Considering rent, salaries, and such, CDEX does not have that kinda money.
LUBBOCK ANGELS TO THE RESCUE?? Is so, they are mighty slow about it. And WADE does not work unless his consultation fee is paid.
Having missed the "free" period, It is at least "SORTA" clear that he does not have the intention to submit more info to the patent office. At least not until he has the money in hand.
WADE has no reason for LOYALITY to the cause. Not on salary. He knows that the G4 will not sell, and cannot pin any hope on that.
That 5K is ABOVE what it would take to run the company and pay WADE his fee, whatever it is he would charge.
I believe that any recap of the GUDE CAP'Ns writings if left to DEMMO, and AMANITA hands, and the ILLUSTERIOUS DIDDY, that all necessary knowledge re the CDEX SCAM and its failed IG4 patent
will come to light. Based on the following brilliant posts...
DEMMO; My New Year's adaptation for the board:
The CDEX Address
One score, less some odd years ago, the founding fathers brought forth an imaginary technology, conceived in lechery, and dedicated to the proposition that you can fool some of the people all of the time.
Now we are engaged in a great debate, testing whether this fallacy, or any fallacy so conceived, can long endure. We are met on a great message board of that debate. The dedicated followers, past and present, battled here for the right to lose their money that the frauds might prosper. This they said, is proper to do.
But, in a larger sense, we could not humiliate, we could not educate, we could not enlighten this hallowed following. The naïve masses, the true believers, had swallowed it, with far less than a nominal power to deduct and reason. The world will little note, nor long remember what was posted here; while it can never forget the scam perpetrated here.
It is rather for us, the truth tellers, be dedicated to the great task before us, that from these humbled and pilfered masses we take increased devotion to that cause which so deprived them of their last full measure of savings, that we here highly resolve that these gullible souls shall not have despaired in vain; that the message boards shall have a new birth of knowledge, that the internet of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not vanquish all investments.
"lechery" was supposed to have been treachery. What was I thinking?
Either way, cdex stuckholders got screwed. lol
AMANITA;
cdex "resolutions" will continue....
A Shareholders meeting and on time SEC filings will take cdex through another successful year of expectations at least for the "team". Long as there are fools, which there will always be, cdex and it's business plan will be a success.
The beginning of a new year is always bonus time for the team. A years hard work hustling suckers for bigger pay checks is tough. I bet we can look forward to progress in the form of an announcement sorta like..."the G4 now includes signatures of gourmet coffees and the ID2 now has been tweaked to include scorpion illumination."
We'll probably see the hiring of another relative to the team as the take expands the payroll. Sales of used parts will taper off as the junk room is cleared. Expect to see slower developments from the "lab" tops due to extended nappy time for the septuagenarian duo that constitutes the "brains" behind the team(at least they have degrees and high school diplomas).
Yep, shareholders have much to look forward to this new year, this is gonna be the big one! Happy expectations cdex!
Sorry, but I did not read all of nearly all of the CAP'Ns non-sequiturs when posted and have no appetite to go back and read them now.
So I leave that to you, Diddy and DEMMO, if DEMMO cares to participate. LOL!!
But what I find amusing is that there are three inventors listed.
Wade M. POTEET Vail, AZ (US)
Carey W. STARZINGER Benson, AZ (US)
Jeffery K. BRUMFIELD Romona, CA (US)
JB would not even have an inkling!
One more post re that fake lawsuit then I will move on.
IRONICALLY, the much reviled LMOROVAN was calling the fake lawsuit as it really was... a fake. But he needed a Lawyer to represent him in court. Sent his son to deliver the message. And finally got ousted from this forum because he would not stop trying to use a religious symbol as his signature. Which is and was against the rules of the owners of this forum. And rightfully so.
A stubborn man, was LMOROVAN.
But it had to be filed with much haste, to beat the wild men to the punch. Never do to have a real DA suit filed.
Note that the DA action filed just lay there for over a year
before it was finally joined with the class action and heard in court.
Also that it simply alleged that LOCH management had neglected its duty to the shareholders. Made no claim of fraud, nor asked for disgorgement.
IF YOU HAVE OPTED OUT..Tough. You don't get nuthin.
If you agree you will get CDEX shares in exchange for your LOCH shares...a certain number, that Is.
Then MP will further make you happy by a reverse split. 1 for 5.
NICE JUDGE!!! LOL!!!
MP, clever as he was in getting the FEDS outa the LOCH BOYOs hair, was nevertheless left nervous re the FEDS.
So he waited until the SOL ran out to resign.
Quit sending the CAP'N his retainer, Probably advised ONTHEDGE and DUBYA to button up...
But unfortunately for his plans, his newly apptd CEO was a very bad choice.
But HECK, ain't nobody perfect, right MP??????LOL!!
Been awhile since this was posted. But since ONTHEEDGE has been the subject of several recent posts, it could be that there are readers of this forum wondering about this fine fellow, and what his earlier contributions to the fortunes of LOCH/CDEX might have been.
ERGO, I post this from way back...
By: ATXMAN
08 Aug 2002, 11:47 AM EDT Msg. 149580 of 149591
Ontheegde/Robert, sir yes you are absolutely correct this is a message board
where information is exchanged and questions are asked. Since you have on
many occasions asked CiscoKidd, where and how he became involved in Loch, I
would like to ask you the same but in a different format. I have no proof
that this handle you post under means you are the same person who has
assisted Loch in the past, so again these are questions and not statements.
However if you would admit to being the same person that would be helpful,
as I would be willing to share more information and questions.
1. Are you currently employed as a broker working small-cap issues?
2. Have you ever promoted Loch as a "buy" via the telephone for your
company?
3. Did you take it upon yourself to contact Baker via telephone in late 99',
and inform him that you could assist with fundraising?
4. Did you not receive a 5% to 7% fee from Baker, for private placements?
Were these fees paid in free-trading stock, restricted stock, or cash?
5. Do you still have clients that are waiting on their stock certificates
from Loch?
6. Did you not participate and raise funds for Loch on 4 different
occasions?
7. How many times did you sit in with TB and friends to discuss promoting
Loch's share price via message boards?
8. In what month did certain private placement holders, contact you
regarding their investment and the rash of negative information but you
informed them everything was ok and you assured them that B&B were men of
the highest integrity and that upon receiving their private placement
shares, if they wanted out you would make sure they would be out with a
profit?
9. Based upon the above did you not inform management that certain plays of
stock would be beneficial to all, like a 3 for 1 stock offering?
10. Did you not meet MP when he was under a consulting agreement with Loch?
11. Did you not bring certain private placement holders from Loch into CDEX
with assurances, that their money would be better protected with this team
as they were men of the highest integrity?
12. Did you not know in advance before any other shareholder that Loch, was
going under the scope of the SEC? Based on that did you not sell shares and
inform other's that it's time to sell?
13. Did you at any time inform certain members of Loch that you would assist
in selling their shares with private placements?
A rather long post related to the LAWSUIT back in 2003...for the benefit of those who do not remember or are actually new to this SCAM....
NOTICE TO ALL SHAREHOLDERS OF LOCH HARRIS, INC.
READ THIS FIRST
---------------
WHY SHOULD I READ THIS? This notice describes a proposed settlement of a
----------------------
lawsuit filed as a class action and derivative action involving Loch Harris,
Inc. ("Loch") and certain of its directors and officers that may result in a
benefit to shareholders of Loch. This notice states that you are allowed to
object to the proposed settlement or opt out of the class. See paragraphs 19 &
20, below. This notice also describes WHAT YOU MUST DO to participate in the
----------------
benefits of the proposed settlement. Also, all short positions in Loch stock
must be covered by April 8, 2003 as described in paragraph 24, below. If you
wish to attend the Court's hearing as described in paragraphs 12-13, below, you
may (but are not required to) do so.
AM I BEING SUED? No. A suit that may affect you is the subject of the
proposed settlement. You do not need to appear in court and you do not need to
hire an attorney unless you so choose. Receipt of this notice does not mean that
the Court will necessarily approve the settlement.
WHAT WILL I GET FROM THIS SETTLEMENT? If the court approves the settlement
and it becomes effective, a reorganization will occur whereby - unless you have
opted out - you may exchange your Loch shares for a certain number of shares in
CDEX, Inc. if you follow the procedures described in this notice; after which
Loch will dissolve and go out of business.
DO I HAVE TO DO ANYTHING? YES, upon receiving a claim form. This is not the
---
claim form but a notice of your rights. Assuming the Court approves the
settlement and it becomes effective, you will be sent a claim form. To
participate in the share exchange, you (or an institutional holder on your
behalf) must send a claim form, together with original share certificates, to
the address specified on the claim form. This procedure is described in greater
detail in paragraphs 16 & 21-23, below. If you do not do so, your rights may be
forfeited when Loch dissolves. You are not eligible to participate in the share
exchange if you opt out of the class.
You are hereby notified of a proposed settlement of a class action /
derivative action. This notice describes the nature of the case and the
proposed settlement. The settlement is subject to the approval of the Court.
I. DEFINITION OF THE CLASS
-----------------------
1. If you were a shareholder of Loch Harris, Inc. as of March 11, 2003,
you are a member of the class, except that the individual defendants and Loch
Harris, Inc. are excluded from the class.
II. THE LAWSUIT
-----------
2. This lawsuit was first filed in January 2002 in the District Court
of Travis County, Texas. The case is presently titled Mari L. Stassi and Robert
Stewart, derivatively on behalf of Loch Harris, Inc.; and Richard C. Miller,
Michael White, and Randy Shillingburg, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, plaintiffs, v. Rodney A. Boone, Mark E. Baker,
<PAGE>
Charles Blackwell, and Robert B. Baker, defendants; Loch Harris, Inc., nominal
defendant, No. GN200180 (District Court, 201st Judicial District, Travis County,
Texas) (the "Lawsuit").
3. The petition (as amended) alleges that defendants R. Boone, M.
Baker, C. Blackwell, and R. Baker (collectively, the "Individual Defendants")
have been directors and/or officers of Loch; owe fiduciary duties to the
plaintiffs and class members; and breached those duties. Specifically,
plaintiffs allege among other things that the Individual Defendants (i) failed
for more than four years to convene a meeting of the shareholders of Loch to
elect board members; (ii) caused or allowed Loch to fail to file periodically
required reports with the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission ("SEC"); (iii)
caused or allowed Loch's independent auditors to resign and to withdraw
financial reports for certain periods, citing accounting irregularities; (iv)
caused or allowed Loch to fail to comply with an asset purchase agreement by
which Loch acquired shares in CDEX, Inc.; and (v) failed to comply with
fiduciary duties of loyalty and care and failed to exercise sound business
judgment in the management of Loch. Plaintiffs allege that these and other
actions of the Individual Defendants caused and continue to cause waste of
Loch's assets and harm to Loch and its public shareholders.
4. The defendants deny any liability and no Court has ruled on any
aspect of plaintiffs' allegations. No trial has occurred.
III. THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
-----------------------
5. Dated January 7, 2003, the parties entered into an agreement titled,
"Term Sheet - Reorganization, Share Exchange, Dissolution, and Liquidation to be
Ordered by the Court pursuant to Settlement of Loch Harris Litigation" (the
"Term Sheet"). Dated February 13, 2003, the parties entered into an amendment
of the Term Sheet (the "First Amendment"). Dated March 7, 2003, the parties
entered into a second amendment of the Term Sheet and amendment of the Plan of
Distribution (the "Second Amendment"). Together, the Term Sheet, First
Amendment, and Second Amendment are referred to as the "Settlement Agreement."
The Settlement Agreement and other papers relevant to the settlement are on file
with the Court and available for your inspection. On January 8, 2003,
defendants caused the Term Sheet to be filed with the SEC as an attachment to a
Form 8-K. The parties will soon file with the SEC an amended and restated Term
Sheet and this notice. You may also read the settlement agreement, as amended
and restated, through a link at www.lochharris.com. This notice summarizes the
------------------
proposed settlement, which includes the following principal components.
6. First, if the settlement is approved, Loch shareholders (except any
members of the class who opt out of participation in the settlement) as of the
date that a final judgment approving the settlement becomes non-appealable (the
"Effective Date"), provided they comply with certain procedures, can participate
in a share exchange so as to receive directly Loch's principal remaining asset -
shares of stock in CDEX, Inc. - through a judicial reorganization / sale. All
of Loch's CDEX shares will be distributed to or on behalf of Loch shareholders
except those used or reserved to cover certain other obligations and expenses as
explained in the Settlement Agreement. At present, CDEX shares are unregistered
and are not sold in any public stock market or exchange. The parties believe
that CDEX, using technology it purchased from Loch, is now testing chemical
detection technologies with potential applications in airport security
(explosives and/or drugs), drug enforcement, border security, and landmine
detection. One of plaintiffs' principal goals in this lawsuit was to enable
class members / shareholders to participate directly and speedily in whatever
value there might be in CDEX shares without the long-term litigation risk that
the technology might become outdated or superseded. The parties
<PAGE>
hope that the settlement, if approved, will accomplish this goal. To the extent
feasible, the share exchange should be accomplished as a non-taxable event. The
parties do not have any detailed knowledge about or make any representations
about CDEX's activities other than that CDEX has made at least one public
announcement on its website.
7. Second, the settlement responds in several ways to plaintiffs'
contention that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties and
committed waste in their control of Loch:
(a) Any CDEX shares that the Individual Defendants directly or
indirectly receive through the share exchange, own, or have a beneficial
interest in will be non-voting or have a voting proxy.
(b) The Individual Defendants and persons whom they control will
be permanently ineligible to serve as directors, officers, employees, or
consultants of CDEX (except that two defendants will be allowed to complete
outstanding obligations to CDEX under consulting agreements that predate
the Settlement Agreement).
(c) Loch will be dissolved promptly after the share exchange
pursuant to the judicial reorganization / sale, so the individual
defendants will necessarily cease the activities that plaintiffs alleged
constituted a continuing breach of fiduciary duty and waste. A liquidator
will be appointed to dispose of the company's remaining property, with the
potential of a final distribution to the former shareholders who
participated in the share exchange and class members who opted out.
(d) Defendant Boone will relinquish 200,000 shares of CDEX and
relinquish his right to 5 million shares of Loch Harris that he contends he
paid for but were not issued; defendant Mark Baker will relinquish 500,000
shares of CDEX; and defendant R.B. Baker will relinquish 1 million shares
of Loch Harris. These relinquished shares will go into the Loch corporate
treasury to be part of the distribution to class members or to fund certain
other obligations and expenses as explained in the Settlement Agreement.
(e) The Individual Defendants (in their capacities as officers and
directors of Loch Harris) and Loch Harris will prevent the company from
distributing any benefit whatsoever (e.g., money, repayment of loans,
compensation of any sort, or any other type of benefit) to the Individual
Defendants except for repayment of funds advanced to the company on or
after September 17, 2001 to pay third-party claims.
8. Third, in addition to these substantive provisions, Loch Harris will
bear the expense of administering the settlement - including giving notice to
the class - assuming Loch Harris is able to raise funds from the sale of stock.
Defendants (and, to the extent relevant, plaintiffs) will also provide to the
Court and counsel periodic sworn verifications that they are complying with the
terms of the settlement. Initially, these verifications will occur at one-month
intervals, tapering off to 3-month intervals until all obligations are
satisfied. Plaintiffs' counsel will monitor these verifications.
9. The settlement also provides that plaintiffs, on behalf of the class
and derivatively on behalf of Loch Harris, and subject to Court approval, intend
to seek an award of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses in the amount
of 3.5 million shares of CDEX, or 4.5 million shares of CDEX if the exchange
ratio actually realized by class members is 9-to-1 or better. Defendants will
support, and Loch Harris will pay, such an award of plaintiffs' counsel's fees
<PAGE>
and expenses. The value of these shares is difficult to establish at this time.
Defendants acknowledge that plaintiffs may apply for an additional award of
cash, to be paid by Loch Harris if the Court so orders, sufficient to meet
estimated tax liability for receipt of the otherwise non-cash fee-and-expense
award. The amount of additional cash that plaintiffs' counsel might apply for
will not exceed $50,000 for each 1 million shares of CDEX awarded. Defendants
reserve the right to oppose, support, or take no position with respect to an
application for the cash portion of the fee-and-expense award. Plaintiffs'
counsel do not intend to make a separate application for reimbursement of their
litigation expenses. Plaintiffs' counsel have prosecuted this lawsuit on a
contingent basis and have not received any payment of fees or any reimbursement
of their out-of-pocket expenses.
10. The settlement further provides that, as an award for their
considerable time and special efforts in seeing this matter through to
conclusion, each of the five plaintiffs will receive from Loch Harris 25,000
additional shares of CDEX beyond the shares they are entitled to receive as part
of the exchange. The value of these shares is difficult to establish at this
time.
11. By order dated March 11, 2003, the Court conditionally certified
the proposed class; appointed plaintiffs Miller, White, and Shillingburg as
class representatives; Clifford Cantor, Esq. as class counsel; plaintiffs Mari
L. Stassi and Robert Stewart as derivative plaintiffs, derivatively on behalf of
Loch Harris, Inc.; and Scott A. Kamber, Esq. as lead derivative counsel; granted
preliminary approval to the settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate;
directed that notice be given to the class and affected shareholders in the
manner that the Court ordered, and scheduled a Final Settlement Hearing.
IV. THE FINAL SETTLEMENT HEARING
----------------------------
12. The Court will hold a hearing (the "Final Settlement Hearing") on
May 30, 2003 at 1:30 p.m. at the Travis County Courthouse, 1000 Guadalupe St.,
Austin, Texas 78701 to consider whether to grant final certification of the
class; whether to grant final approval to the settlement as fair, reasonable and
adequate to the class; to hear any objections to the settlement; and to consider
plaintiffs' applications for plaintiff awards and a fee-and-expense award.
13. Class members have the right to participate, either in person or
through counsel retained by them, in the Final Settlement Hearing. If the Court
approves the proposed settlement, your attendance or non-attendance will not
affect your rights under the settlement. Persons who wish to comment orally on
the settlement, however, must state in writing their intention to appear at the
Final Settlement Hearing and the nature of their proposed comment, and must
serve that document and all supporting documents in the time and manner
prescribed for written objections described in paragraph 20, below.
14. The Court may postpone or adjourn the Final Settlement Hearing
without further notice to the class.
V. RELEASE OF CLAIMS
-----------------
15. If the Court approves the settlement and it becomes effective, the
final judgment will contain general releases of certain claims that you may
have, or certain claims that others may have against you, as follows:
(a) A release by all named plaintiffs, all members of the class
(except any members of the class who opt out of participation in the
settlement), and Loch, for the benefit of the Individual Defendants and
their counsel and of nominal defendant Loch
<PAGE>
and its counsel, of all claims that relate to or arise under in any way the
facts alleged or that could have been alleged in the pleadings and/or the
defendants' acts or omissions in connection with this litigation or the
business of Loch at any time prior to the date that the Settlement
Agreement receives final approval by the Court (except that the releases
will not cover breaches of the Settlement Agreement), including but not
limited to claims under Sec. 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15
U.S.C. Sec. 78p.
(b) A release by all Individual Defendants and nominal defendant
Loch, for the benefit of all named plaintiffs and their counsel, all
members of the class (except any members of the class who opt out of
participation in the settlement) and their counsel, and Loch and its
counsel, of all claims that relate to or arise out of acts or omissions in
connection with this litigation or the business of Loch at any time prior
to the date that the Settlement Agreement receives final approval by the
Court (except that the releases will not cover breaches of the Settlement
Agreement). The final judgment will also provide that the Individual
Defendants may not assert any claim they may have against Loch to be
collected, directly or indirectly, against CDEX shares or the proceeds
thereof or any assets of Loch in liquidation except as provided in
paragraph 7(e) above. (This release does not, however, affect in any way
the Individual Defendants' claims as shareholders of Loch and participation
in the distribution of CDEX shares by Loch.)
Notwithstanding the above, the releases will not cover claims to carry out the
terms of settlement.
VI. YOUR RIGHTS AS A SHAREHOLDER AND CLASS MEMBER
---------------------------------------------
16. If you are a Loch shareholder at the time its becomes necessary to
turn in your share certificates (and you have not opted out of the class), you
are eligible to participate in the share exchange if the Court approves the
settlement.
PARTICIPATION: Unless you opt out, Loch will mail a claim form to you (or an
-------------
institution that holds stock on your behalf) upon the Court's approval of the
settlement. The claim form will also be available through a link at
www.lochharris.com at that time. TO PARTICIPATE, you (or the institution that
------------------ --------------
holds stock on your behalf) must fill out the claim form and submit it to the
addressee shown on the form, together with original Loch share certificates.
You must make sure the addressee on the claim form receives these documents by a
DEADLINE that will be fixed by the Court at the Final Settlement Hearing and
--------
will be approximately 60 days after final approval. Once the Court sets this
date, it will be posted through a link at www.lochharris.com and also will be
------------------
shown on the claim form. If you own Loch shares but cannot produce original
share certificates, the Plan of Distribution, which will be available through a
link at www.lochharris.com, describes a manner in which you may petition the
------------------
Court for an exemption and a deadline for doing so. If you do not timely file a
claim, you may forfeit your rights as a Loch shareholder.
17. If you remain a member of the class, you will be represented by
class counsel as have been appointed by the Court, unless you enter an
appearance through counsel of your own choice at your own expense. You are not
required to obtain your own counsel, but if you choose to do so, your counsel
must file an appearance on your behalf by May 16, 2003 and serve copies of such
appearance on counsel for the parties as identified below.
<PAGE>
18. You will not be subject to any direct out-of-pocket obligation to
pay the costs of the lawsuit. An award of attorneys' fees and expenses for
plaintiffs' counsel will be paid by Loch in an amount to be approved by the
Court.
19. You have the right to "opt out" or exclude yourself from the class.
To opt out, you must so request in writing, with duplicate copies received no
later than May 16, 2003 by attorneys Clifford Cantor, Esq. and John Courtade,
Esq. at their addresses shown in paragraph 26 below, stating in effect that you
wish to opt out of the class in this case, No. GN2-00180. The request must be
signed by all owners of the Loch Harris shares (e.g., both spouses if the shares
are owned jointly), dated, and must clearly and legibly show your name(s),
address(es), and number of Loch shares owned. If you opt out of the class, you
will not be eligible to participate in the CDEX share exchange. Also, you will
not be bound by any final judgment in this action to the extent the judgment
relates to the class; but will still be bound by the judgment to the extent it
relates to the derivative action. Among other things, this means that the
releases given to and from the class in the final judgment will not apply to you
and class counsel will not represent you. You are free to consult your own
attorney about opting out. Although you will be eligible as a shareholder (even
if you opt out) to participate in a final distribution of any assets remaining
at the end of the liquidation of Loch, it is anticipated that there will be few
if any assets remaining at that time. Most of Loch's assets will be used in the
settlement of this lawsuit, and you will not be eligible for the share exchange
if you opt out. If you opt out, you will retain whatever claims you may have
against Loch and defendant officers and directors of Loch, but you must judge
for yourself, with the advice of your own counsel, whether pursuing any such
claim is practicable and, if you were successful, whether any judgment would be
collectible.
20. Unless you opt out, you have the right to object to any of the
terms of the class aspects of the settlement. (Even if you opt out of the
class, you may still object to the derivative aspects of the settlement.) If
you object, you must do so in writing received no later than May 16, 2003 by Ms.
Amalia Rodriguez-Mendoza, Travis County District Clerk, Travis County
Courthouse, 1000 Guadalupe St., Austin, Texas 78701 and all counsel for the
parties at the addresses set forth below. You must include in writing the basis
for your objection, any supporting papers, and reasonable proof of class
membership (e.g., a copy of share certificates or of a brokerage statement
showing your ownership of Loch shares). No representative of any shareholder
shall be heard by this Court if not a member in good standing of the Bar of the
State of Texas or otherwise admitted to appear before this Court prior to the
Final Settlement Hearing,
VII. PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION
--------------------
21. Loch will send a Court-approved claim form to its shareholders in
the following manner:
a. Loch will mail the claim form to all shareholders of record
(except any members of the class who opt out) at the address reflected on
the official stock ledger as of the date of the entry of the order granting
final approval of the settlement.
b. Loch will mail the claim form to any depository trust company
or its nominee(s) reflected on the official stock ledger as of the date of
entry of the order granting final approval of the settlement.
22. Loch will also make the claim form available through a link at
www.lochharris.com shortly after the Court approves the form.
------------------
<PAGE>
23. The claim form will require that shareholders (or others, acting on
behalf of shareholders) - except any members of the class who opt out - fill out
the requested information and send the claim form, along with original share
certificates, to Loch's transfer agent. The transfer agent will issue CDEX
share certificates. The entire plan of distribution is available through a link
at www.lochharris.com. NOTE: Current shareholders or members of the class will
------------------ ----
become ineligible to participate in the share exchange if they sell all their
----------
Loch shares before submitting their claim form along with original share
certificates. Conversely, persons - regardless of whether they are current
shareholders - who make new purchases of Loch shares will become eligible to
--------
participate in the share exchange (unless they are class members and opt out)
provided that such purchasers submit a claim form along with original share
certificates before the deadline to be set by the Court for submitting claims.
See paragraph 16, above. (The Court will set the claim DEADLINE if and when the
--------
Court approves the settlement. The deadline will be after the Effective Date as
defined in paragraph 6, above.)
VIII. SHORT POSITIONS MUST BE COVERED
-------------------------------
24. The Court has ordered that, by April 8, 2003 at 5:00 p.m. Central
Time, which is 28 days after the entry of the order granting preliminary
approval, all persons or entities must cover any short positions that they may
hold in Loch stock.
IX. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED TO INDICATE YOUR APPROVAL
-----------------------------------------------
25. If you approve of the settlement, you do not need to take any
action to indicate your approval.
X. COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES
-----------------------
26. Counsel for the parties include the following:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S> <C>
----------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------
Clifford Cantor, Esq. John Courtade, Esq.
Law Offices of Clifford A. Cantor, P.C. Law Office of John Courtade, P.C.
P.O. Box 305 4408 Spicewood Springs Rd.
Redmond, WA 98073-0305 Austin, TX 78759
Counsel for class plaintiffs and the class Counsel for defendants R. Boone, M. Baker,
& R. Baker
----------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------
Scott A. Kamber, Esq. Frank Arnold, Esq.
Wechsler Harwood LLP Law Office of Frank Arnold
488 Madison Ave. 1515 S. Capitol of Texas Highway, Suite 415
New York, NY 10022 Austin, TX 78746
Counsel for derivative plaintiffs, derivatively Counsel for Loch Harris, Inc.
on behalf of Loch Harris
----------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------
</TABLE>
[Note: Defendant Charles Blackwell has appeared pro se without counsel.]
XI. EXAMINATION OF PAPERS
---------------------
27. This notice only provides a summary of the lawsuit and the proposed
settlement. For more detailed information, please refer to the Settlement
Agreement, the pleadings, and other papers filed in this lawsuit, which you may
inspect at the Office of the Clerk, Travis County Courthouse, 1000 Guadalupe
St., Austin, Texas 78701 during business hours of each day. As
<PAGE>
stated above, defendants filed a copy of the Term Sheet with the SEC, which you
may read on the SEC's website; and certain other relevant documents are posted
on the Internet.
28. A copy of this Notice is posted on the Internet through a link at
www.lochharris.com.
------------------
XII. CDEX REVERSE STOCK SPLIT
------------------------
29. CDEX is undergoing a 5-to-1 reverse stock split. All numbers of
CDEX shares and all ratios involving CDEX shares expressed in this notice and
other settlement documents are in pre-split terms. If the split is finalized
prior to effectuation of the settlement, all such numbers and all ratios will be
adjusted accordingly.
Notice approved: March 11, 2003 The Honorable Patrick O. Keel
District Court of Travis County, Texas
<PAGE>
</TEXT>
</DOCUMENT>
Since MP orchestrated the lawsuits, from start to finish, including the LOCHBOYOS grabbing the shares, the selection of Counsel was also approved by him, or was his. Hard to imagine otherwise.
And most certainly the named Plaintiffs in both the lawsuits
were selected by him, except possibly Millie, who nae doot was adjudged harmless, but had a law degree to make it look more legit.
LOL!! Back then, MP was EVERYBODYS darling.
It was only later that unrest amongst the shareholders stirred up animosity towards him. And his erstwhile pals such as you joined in on the chorus.
Most likely encouraged by MP who wanted as much space as he could get from the public CDEX. And still maintain control, that is.
Does not dispute is a simple flick off. Refusal to engage. Will not respond to any allegations. Does not recognize the authority of the filer to demand information.
In street vernacular, go do a biologically impossible feat of physical manipulation on yourself.
LOCH was not worried by the DA, because they had MP on their side. And they knew stuff that neither MP nor the filers wished to become known.
Which was why the DA filers hastened to tale over the DA suit that some wild man had engaged a Lawyer to file.
Which re-raises another QUESTION. Why are you arguing with DIDDY about how much the LOCH BOYOs got away with??
The GUDE JEDGE TUTT TUTTED the LOCH BOYOS, made them give up the shares, and chased them outa the PENNY SCAM BIDNESS. Which they agreed to do with profound relief that they were not prosecuted by the FEDS, and kept their money. GOOD MOVE FOR THEM when they selected MP to take over CDEX. By orchestrating the lawsuits, he saved their bacon... and their money.
But left MP nervous about them FEDS. He was a LOCH INONIT big time. So he put off resigning until the SOL ran out.
IRONICALLY, the three plaintiffs re the class action were big supporters of MP at the time, except MILLIE, who as a Lawyer SHOULD have seen what was coming down, but really did not have much of a clue. All he knew was that he wanted his dang shares back, stolen by the LOCH BOYOS.
MILLIE was a fence straddler, not sure whether he was being given the Idiot treatment or not. Ran hot and cold re CDEX.
He should have stuck with real estate closings.
Unfortunately for your cause, the history of CDEX is there plain enough for all to see. Assuming that they care to look.
Strain to the utmost, and you cannot put a pretty face on the CDEX HAG.
So somebody showed up at the LAB today? Well LA DE DA! Doing what? Looking for more stuff to sell on E-BAY? Was the CEO by happenstance amongst the show ups??
Since CDEX is out of money, maybe someone trying to make a case to sue for unpaid salary?
The image that WADE had created as the good-natured innocent fat boy genius who Kow Towed to authority and did as told by the evil MP took a hit or two back then.
JB took care when he brought him back to designate him as a consultant, not an employee. Most likely on the advice of MP.
But CDEX needed a new DOO-HICKY and a plausible inventor. Wade as a Doctor, filled the bill. So was born the IMAGINARY G4.
You nailed it, AMANITA!!
I do remember that WADE did object to being "retired" even though MP bragged on him a lot on the then upkept website.
Also that Wade wanted some stuff outa the LAB that he claimed was his personal property.... it was a part of the arbitration settlement to let him haul it away, whatever it was.
So to the extent that scenario is real, it seems that WADE was denied access to the LAB. Maybe he had gotten too big for his britches, and expected to become CEO when MP finally left town, and MP wanted to appoint someone more loyal to himself like the one he did appoint.
Also I remember that WADE had made one or two posts to a forum
back when blame was flying around, SMA posts, and MP told him in affect, to shut his mouth. MP as a trained Lawyer and JURIS DOCTOR and as CEO demanded strict control over all public utterances regarding CDEX.
There is not much honor amongst thieves, so it can be expected that a power struggle or two will pop up along the way.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=92377682
ANYBODY wanta hear a fairy tale??
In which the new BOD was born..and the auld one left toon...
In August 2009, four former employees and one former contractor (the “Claimants”) filed demands for arbitration with the American Arbitration Association related to deferred wages of approximately $89,000 and to the ownership of certain equipment. A decision was issued by the Arbitrator which the Company received on June 11, 2010. The decision awarded the Claimants three times their deferred wages, plus attorney fees, totaling approximately $270,000.
This arbitration decision created a financial strain on the Company and as such the Board of Directors was forced to find new sources of financing.
Blame them Rascals..say did'nt WADE, lead that charge?? LOL!! Say, wasn't money already short around the CDEX barn?? LOL!!
On or about August 11, 2010, at the invitation of the then sitting Board of Directors, the Company received an offer for financing from PEMCO, LLC, College Health and Investment LP, and Messrs. Peter Maina, Robert Stewart, Scott A. Newby, Thomas Payne and Milt Datsopoulos. Of these, PEMCO LLC and Messrs. Maina, Stewart, Newby, Payne and Datsopoulos were investors in the Company. Part of the terms in their offer required a change to both the management of the Company and its Board of Directors. The offer presented to the board was a new agreement which granted exclusive distribution rights within the United States for all products developed by the Company for applications specifically related to the field of Oncology to various parties for a period of five years in exchange for cash (“Oncology Distribution Agreement”).
Dang!! And I was giving JB credit for that coup!!!
The Board seated at that time determined that the terms of the financing offer as presented were in the best interests of both the Company and its stockholders and as such at a Board of Directors meeting held August 28, 2010 the Board agreed to the terms of the Oncology Distribution Agreement and appointed as new members of the Board Messrs. Jeffrey K. Brumfield, Frank E. Wren, Brain Jenkins, Thomas Payne and Robert H. Foglesong. Subsequently, Messrs. Carmen J. Conicelli, Jr., Donald W. Strickland, Gregory Firmbach and George Dials resigned from their positions on the Board of Directors. Mr. Strickland resigned from his position as the Company's Chief Executive Officer and Mr. Firmbach resigned from his position as President. The newly seated Board elected Jeffrey K. Brumfield as the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer. Subsequent to this, effective December 11, 2010, Thomas Payne resigned from the CDEX Board of Directors and effective December 15, 2010 James G. Stevenson, Pharm.D. joined the CDEX Board of Directors.
Good of auld TOM to make room for GUDE OLE JIM!!!
The Company has executed the Oncology Distribution Agreement and has received a total of $483,500 in exchange for the exclusive distribution rights granted under the Agreement. Subsequent to the 2010 fiscal year end, two investors, College Health and Investment LP and Thomas Payne, representing $100,000, withdrew from the Agreement. The signatories to the Agreement are PEMCO, LLC, Messrs. Maina, Stewart, Newby and Datsopoulos. It is believed that none of these individual investors beneficially control 5% or more of the Company’s outstanding stock.
AH SO!! Maybe not so good of auld TOM. He wanted his money back.