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.
No doubt board member will change his alias again. lol!
See intellectneurosciences.com then click on company info and go to regulatory info you then see Sec filings.
ILNS settled with Pfizer December 31st 2014 for peanuts $1.2mil each party to absorb own legal fees. You are not going to hear this information from certain parties on this board as it directly contradicts the crap they were talking for so long. Thank God that crap is done with.
Where is Shaka? last time we heard from him was 11/26/14 when he said "everything looking good". price trending? relax yall dis a long haul nuttin hapenin nah.
Good answer for that nonsense!
OH boy that's really really funny but true.
you see the same repetition and Lingo so one can easily figure out who that character emerged as. Changed your name but crazy talk never changes.
Where is Shaka and his predictions, fell off the planet did he?
Information is there for everyone to read, click link, party search then place intellect neurosciences in the field search box. Every
body has access to same information there is no real discovery on this board.
https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivil/FCASMain
Believe me there is no explanation for those crazy links.
now your brain is at full 1% capacity. full steam ahead lol
Hell then you shouldn't be more than 1/2" from the ground! lol
I for one didn't invest more than $1,000 when my shares are reduced after RS i will not, will not invest another dime until i am satisfied otherwise. One would be insane to invest more than $2,000 into most penny stocks and even more derange to use charts to predict ILNS stock as i have seen some do.
In fact you hardly see the post of the chart guys lately. I am very happy for this RS it changes the game, the stupid chart talk and the stop repeat and play crap.
RS is a good decision for this trading environment.
play, stop and repeat.
could very well be.
Its a penny stock for goodness sake! shareholder's letter good update for a very high risk arena.
Don't be consumed by on going legal matters with Pfizer, Pfizer is not the
Beginning and end of Intellect. See new shareholder letter issued overall
positive news i am encouraged.
Stop, play and repeat the same crap all the time.
And the followers say........... Hooray!
raid the fields make your sounds!
Cricket.
press play, stop and repeat the same crap all the time ranting about Pfizer. when are they going to realize their source is also on a hamster wheel.
Stop playing in the grounds where cricket sounds are and get some advice from the people in your neighborhood
I never called that guy a follower the message was intended for you but he being as irrational as he could interpreted it as such.
bet that person got a stupid response from you then but now you realize.
Apparently you have a problem reading lower case letters as well, did the "follower comment go to your inbox? never mind don't answer that.
OH BOY, once again, i agree with ILNS I MERELY TRIED TO CLARIFY WHAT THE ISSUES ARE AND NOT WHO WOULD PREVAIL, OH BOY I SEE WHY WE WOULD DISAGREE.
SIT SMALL.
You are a follower, i can tell by your past comments. And so when i post i post for your leaders.
You are so emotionally caught up in this that you are relying on your imagination to understand events. PFIZER STOPPED (IS A CORRECT STATEMENT) USING PONEZIMAB BY THE TIME THE CASE WAS LODGED AGAINST THEM IN 2012 THAT IS THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THE DEFENCE RELAYED THEIR MESSAGE.
AND THAT WHETHER THEY'RE USING PONEZUMAB OR NOT IS NOT A FACTOR TO THE PLAINTIFF OR DEFENCE, ANOTHER POINT YOU SEEMED TO HAVE MISSED. PLAINTIFF IS STATING PONEZUMAB IS THE COMPOUND CONTAINED IN THE CONTRACT WHETHER DEFENDANTS USED IT OR NOT IS IMMATERIAL.
THE PLAINTIFF FACT IS THAT THE GRANT OF THE PATENT FOR PONEZUMAB IS COVERED IN THE COMPOUND HENCE TRIGGERING THE MILESTONE PAYMENT. DEFENCE IS SAYING WHAT PONEZUMAB? THE DEFENCE SAYS THE WORD PONEZUMAB DOES NOT EXIST IN CONTRACT AND THAT CONTRACT SAYS WOULD INFRINGE NOT WILL INFRINGE you have a long way to go in grasping the issues. that summarizes the issues. THIS CASE IS ABOUT BREACH OF CONTRACT REGARDING CONTRACT TERMS, NOT A PHYSICAL (USING PONEZUMAB) BREACH BY THE DEFENCE. I would venture to say a settlement in this case may only exist in "fairy land" WOULDN'T ADVISE HOLDING YOUR BREATH.
STOP SITTIN ON THE EDGE OF YAH SEAT IT AIN'T HAPPENIN AS FAST THAT, RELAX WE HAVE A WAYS TO GO.
Judge Oing in no way shape or form indicated that, if he had he would have clearly been biased. In fact after Oing said that the Defence Attorney agreed. You think he would have agreed to that assertion. Read the whole transcript man! What i am saying is that Pfizer has a reasonable argument but not one that would prevail and not an argument that would attract fraud.
(That's so much -- that's still) That so much bullshit that's still bullshit"
I am not certain you have a handle on Defendant's issues. These are the issues Intellect claims license fees from Pfizer for the issuance of a patent for Ponezumab. Pfizer claims that Ponezumab was not a patent in the contract signed in 2008 and that they were using a method (compound) for the disease in the contract and Pfizer says Ponezumab is nowhere mentioned in contract.
And Pfizer said the use of the term "would" infringe did not indicate that if this ponezumab is use it "will" infringe and therefore triggering a milestone payment. Read pages 7 to 22 again and you may see how they would reasonably question whether a duty is owed to Intellect.
That's why i said not in this instance fraud would have a place even in Plaintiff arguments. Read and see how important the term "would" is playing as an excuse for Defence arguments, of course.
Pfizer will no doubt present evidence that would reasonably state why they presented that claim. Even though i believe they are bound to fail. Because something may be so obvious to you means obvious apparent to another. In other words Oing could rule against Pfizer but still believe they had reasonable grounds to qiestion contract.
you are not getting it. Pfizer's Attorney is not making any representations for himself, he is there on behalf of his client, Focus on Pfizer not their Attorney. Not in this instance.
Yes i understand Damages and the like, courts award all sorts of damages in instances such as this may be, however an Attorney being held liable for his clients sentiments is highly unlikely in this scenario but as you said we'll see.
"This is not about a crimnal attorney defending his client.This is imo a criminal act against ILNS its shareholders to cause more harm/damages".
"You do understand if that ongoing ponezumab phase II trial ongpoing was not put into evidence along with Maza'z affidavit that attorneys (LIES) may have gotten the case dismissed causing more harm to ILNS its shareholders".
No, he won't be disbarred no more than a criminal Attorney who defended a guilty client.
"No the worst case scenario is KHAWAJA is disbarred and charged with perjury".