My posts are designed to promote discussion, seek validation, convey facts, and share relevant resources.
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.
Never said it was. It's called a warning.
We agree on the triggering as a causative factor. That's about it.
Dr. Charles Hoffe: mRNA Vaccines ‘Will Kill Most People’ Through Heart Failure & 62% Already Have Microscopic Blood Clots
https://luis46pr.wordpress.com/2021/07/14/dr-charles-hoffe-mrna-vaccines-will-kill-most-people-through-heart-failure-62-already-have-microscopic-blood-clots/
The book I mentioned is the third in a series that explain contamination of "vaccines" along with Fauci's role in many diseases present today.
No further trials needed as Ivermectin has been around a long time--long enough for it's patent protection to have expired.
That's great news! Did you catch the Coach Belichick comments on the players, coaches staff that were jabbed and still got CV?
https://www.redvoicemedia.com/2021/09/video-coach-belichick-just-dropped-a-vax-truth-bomb-all-over-the-nlf/
That's a false assumption--that critical thinkers were having a bad moment.
JF is long gone from penny stocks. He didn't run either company and he didn't sign a loan with DGF. He had no voice in the Baruch criminal case.
Yeah, I will continue to separate the wheat from the chaff.
I read every court filing. I see no reason to separate the wheat from the chaff.
JF wasn't the only person sellng.
Where did you get the view the company would be thriving without Turner? We will never know what he could have done because: 1) He was fired, and 2) When he returned in 2020, he refused to follow a court order to upload unaudited simple financial statements that could have helped investors better understand the need and the proposal to solve the problem at hand.
Then he went silent except for an 8-K to announce an insolvency proceeding and his private phone discussions with his 1-3 favorite shareholders.
I've said it before, and will say it again. The major issue I see that contributed to the funding problem is the triggering event. Bignitz should have placed Baruch on leave KNOWING his criminal case was pending.
That Turner video, though, ugh...it was bad, and even JF knew it was bad since it precipitated alot of dumping. Lots of negative comments were made and some by attendees.
Don't forget that nasty letter berating the company that was sent to a prospective customer from a disgruntled shareholder ripping Bignitz.
Geez...so many dysfunctional people interfered with a noble mission to use cannabis for medical solutions.
Watch the video and read the posts. Very unimpressive.
No pro-Turner history lesson is necessary. The point is the financial harm caused by Ziv Turner's actions. Regardless of setting, there was a selloff BECAUSE of Turner's weak and wayward speech on Wednesday, March 1, 2017. Anyone can read the negative messages posted after that "speech" so yeah his language barrier is an issue.
Look at the price drop from March 1-3.
Date Open High Low Close* Adj Close** Volum
Mar 03, 2017 1.7100 1.8000 1.0600 1.3600 1.3600 12,507,194
Mar 02, 2017 2.0250 2.0500 1.6700 1.7000 1.7000 5,904,807
Mar 01, 2017 2.6650 2.6800 1.9000 2.0600 2.0600 6,628,650
Feb 28, 2017 2.7000 2.8600 2.5100 2.6200 2.6200 3,857,704
Turner was fired for a reason. If Low was the problem, he allowed that problem to change company course rather than make concessions and pursue his goals collaboratively.
Lawsuits are expensive. Turner is now involved in his third one that costs shareholders in the long run.
Turner was also difficult to deal with during Q1 2020 when Browdy was wrapping up the patent assignments. That was apparent through the USPTO documents.
Aside from the fact that DGF reported the plan to obtain the IP in his court filings, and we've been seeing this play out since Turner returned, you're the person that informed shareholders of the plan to dump DGF, file bankruptcy, and have Feldenkrais acquire IP on the cheap.
Why meet privately with Turner then spread his plan and publicly inform people there are some things you can't share? Why are shareholders publicly thanking you for the tip to buy CATV on the cheap?
It's all accessible information.
Again, what matters is how the courts rule on the motions. I see no reason to speculate before and beyond their decisions.
Just as how Ivermectin could have stopped this lab generated "pandemic," it also can stop cancer. Why would anyone want to take another "vaccine" from Moderna or their competitors when they've proven to be contaminated?
The most censored expert on these contaminated lab created "viruses" has another book in the New York Times best-selling Plague series out yesterday. It's titled "Ending Plague.". Gain-of-Function Fauci is exposed, yet again, for his role in "infection through injection."
Natural Immunity Offers 13x Better Protection Against Delta Variant Than Pfizer Vaccine: Study
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/spencerbrown/2021/08/31/natural-immunity-offers-better-protection-against-delta-variant-than-mrna-vaccines-study-n2595054
Nothing was missed on my part. It does seem you didn't read the SDNY Reply. DGF stated what they want to happen next--a favorable ruling so they petition the Delaware Chancery Court.
You're not making sense. The Delaware Court has jurisdiction. There is no "accepted" question.
Again, when the SDNY and Delaware Chancery Court issue Decisions, shareholders can learn what Turner hid from them.
Feldenkrais hid the Federal Court case from CATV shareholders.
Birds of a feather.
It appears the fixation is more about the World according to Ziv Turner in which Turner tried to pull off votes to amend the share structure with an audience that didn't have access to the financials.
Cart before the horse doesn't work.
Turner created problems for this company. Remember the selloff after Ziv's pathetic "speech" in New York? Remember he sued OWCP? Remember the company had to sue a New York company because of Turner's language comprehension issues?
Turner refused to comply with a SDNY Federal Court Order to file the financials he doesn't want shareholders to see.
If and when this company is run by an ethical businessman, who understands full disclosure is not an option, we will be able to see what Turner is hiding from us.
SCIENCE TEAM REVEALS GRAPHENE, ALUMINUM, LNP CAPSIDS, PEG & PARASITES IN 4 CoV - 19 VACCINES
Updated: 2 days ago
https://www.drrobertyoung.com/post/science-team-reveals-graphene-aluminum-lnp-capsids-peg-parasites-in-4-cov-vaccines
Well, if that's true, we won't have to vote the bums out. We'll be filling alot of open seats.
Oh, you must be referring to the World according to Ziv Turner. Shareholders rejected that soundly.
So you disagree with a priority list that would have kept OWCP compliant with the SDNY Court Order and OTC Markets, and would ensure shareholders are informed of their financial condition.
Got it.
I don't see the relevance of your dissertation. All Turner had to do with that $200k loan was immediately file unaudited financials to allow shareholders to assess for themselves the financial condition of the company, pay the relatively small fee to the European Patent Office to allow the Intended MM Patent Grant to be wrapped up, and the maintenance fees for a few pending patents.
Obviously, he wanted to follow his plan with Feldenkrais to stiff DGF and thus OWCP shareholders.
I'm not here to play games.
I don't share your perspective and wonder why others care about my investment decisions, and those of other shareholders.
No, that's not what is happening. DGF is holding Turner accountable to the SDNY Court Order. Once that Decision is issued, they will request a determination from the Delaware Chancery Court.
Two separate actions within two separate jurisdictions.
The Courts are not deceptive. The pleadings from DGF are not deceptive.
There is no "security fraud" action in either Court. DGF simply countered the information that Turner shared with other entities than the SDNY Court in efforts to stop DGF from gaining what is rightfully theirs to own.
I've been reporting those patent actions, and have recently decided to stop, when it became apparent that Turner chose not to pay the small fees to continue the patent processes and the European MM patent that was approved.
The patents in process can be revived. It's unknown if the games Turner has been playing to avoid responsibility to shareholders can be used to activate the MM patent. That one doesn't look promising on the surface.
I'm not getting out for those reasons. I'm waiting for the SDNY and Chancery Court Decisions.
As a shareholder, I'm only interested in the Decision in this SDNY case, and the Decision of the Delaware Chancery Court. Your opinions about Kirkland are simply not grounded in the facts presented to the Courts.
Turner was the CEO of OWCP and OWC Israel when he agreed to the Stipulation in the SDNY Case. He received $200k for the purpose of submitting financials (unaudited).
There's no excuse for Turner's non-compliance.
There's no evidence that supports your belief that Kirkland erred in this case. His attorneys are light years ahead of the idiot that filed that letter.
No one has accused DGF of fraud in a court of jurisdiction so that is also irrelevant.
Kirkland has addressed the false claims from Team Turner in the SDNY case.
The email was sent to DGF the day before Kugelman resigned thru an 8-K. They had time to talk.
Never assume business associates are "friends." It's business not personal.
There won't be a need to testify. The Injunction will be Granted since Turner's attorneys failed to file a proper Response and their Letter was denied by the Court.
No one said Turner filed the Form 15. Edgar proves what I stated is true.
My words:
The CATV worms from the old regime must have become aware of the Turner/Feldenkrais plan to move OWCs patented cannabis cream into the hands of Feldenkrais.
It's not working out so well. Turner gave the middle finger to a New York Federal Court and OWCP shareholders. He didn't pay a small fee to complete a 2021 European Multiple Myeloma patent grant. It's all about the patented cream that was approved March 31, 2020--the same day OWCP filed a Form 15 without a word to shareholders as to why they would not want to market the cream. Now we know why. The plan was to file for insolvency, dump OWCP's funder, and have the assets move into the hands of Turner allies for their gain.
From a legal and strategic perspective, I disagree. The World According to Ziv Turner, as has been portrayed by his personal IR team since last Fall, is a one-sided account. It is based on the views of a man child so driven by his own greed (cream patent) and ego that shareholders, and the patent approved for a grant, no longer matter.
The SDNY Court now knows that Turner deliberately refused to comply with the SDNY Court's Order to file financials. I'm hoping he finds Turner in Contempt.
Turner and Feldenkrais appear to be never-ending trouble for their investors.
That's the realistic interpretation. I will repeat a point I made previously. Affidavits are written in chronological order, and the pump & dump amount fits with 2021 stock price history.
BOMBSHELL UK data destroys entire premise for vaccine push
https://chriswaldburger.substack.com/p/bombshell-uk-data-destroys-entire
Previous Covid Prevents Delta Infection Better Than Pfizer Shot
By Michelle Fay Cortez
August 27, 2021, 12:38 AM CDT
Previous Covid Prevents Delta Infection Better Than Pfizer Shot
By Michelle Fay Cortez
August 27, 2021, 12:38 AM CDT
DGF submitted it to the SDNY Court today.
In March 2021, the Judge rejected Dov's request to appear Pro Hac Vice.
I don't have time to clean it up. Will do that later. Enjoy.
REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR A PERMANENT INJUNCTION
Defendant OWC Pharmaceutical Research Corp. (“OWCP”) has no valid factual or legal basis to oppose the motion for summary judgment of Plaintiff Discover Growth Fund, LLC (“Discover”). OWCP therefore seeks to effectively defeat the motion by refusing to oppose it, and thereby continue to deny Discover the relief to which it is unquestionably entitled. On August 25, 2021, instead of filing a normal opposition to Discover‘s motion, OWCP‘s counsel filed a two-page letter claiming that OWCP cannot properly oppose the motion, and—even though such issue is nowhere near ripe—that it purportedly cannot comply with the proposed Permanent Injunction if issued. Because OWCP’s counsel does not have personal knowledge of most of the facts contained in the letter, this Court should not consider or rely upon it in deciding Discover’s motion. Rather, the entirety of Discover’s statement of undisputed facts should be deemed admitted because OWCP did not oppose Discover’s motion. Accordingly, Discover’s motion for summary judgment should be granted because it is undisputed that the parties’ agreements require OWCP to file public reports to be listed on the OTCQB market. It is further undisputed that OWCP’s defenses to avoid complying with its contractual requirements are without merit—the undisputed facts establish that Discover has not engaged in securities fraud and has not acted as a dealer. OWCP’s most recent letter essentially concedes that the corporation has no facts to support these claims. Yet OWCP’s former directors repeated these false allegations to the corporation’s stock transfer agent, Edgar filing service, accountants and auditors, thus preventing Discover from obtaining necessary cooperation from anyone to cause its shares to be issued. OWCP now asks the Court not to rule on these baseless claims, leaving Discover with no court order or judgment to point to in order to vindicate itself. The practical result of leaving these accusations hanging is that Discover will be presumed potentially guilty until proven innocent, and will remain unable to move forward with anything.
The Court may recall that, in an attempt to oppose the preliminary injunction early in the case, OWCP claimed that its former director would resign rather than comply with the order. The Court properly disregarded this, since it is the corporate entity that is required to comply, not any individual alone. OWCP now makes the same threat again, saying that another director will resign rather than comply. But that is not a valid legal defense. If a final judgment is entered in this case, and the director of OWCP resigns, and no successor is appointed, Discover will have available to it all applicable remedies under Delaware law. If necessary, Discover can seek further relief in the Delaware Court of Chancery. With a clear ruling from this Court—as to OWCP’s obligations and as to the meritless nature of its accusations that Discover has engaged in securities law violations and is an unregistered dealer—the Delaware Chancery Court will no doubt be quick to act. However, if these meritless accusations are allowed to linger, obtaining relief in Delaware will be much more difficult. A Delaware state court is not going to risk stepping on the toes of a New York federal court. Which is, no doubt, what OWCP is counting on.
ARGUMENT
Summary judgment is appropriate when “there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed R. Civ. P. 56(a). “It is the movant’s burden to initially demonstrate the absence of material facts that preclude summary judgment.” Carroll v. Krumpter, 397 F. Supp. 3d 234, 243 (E.D.N.Y. 2019) (citing Huminski v. Corsones, 396 F.3d 53, 69 (2d Cir. 2005)). “If the moving party meets the initial burden, the nonmoving party must present specific facts that demonstrate there is a genuine issue that should be left for the fact-finder to decide.” Carroll, 397 F. Supp. 3d at 243 (citing Davis v. New York, 316 F.3d 93, 100 (2d Cir. 2002)). Case 1:20-cv-02857-AKH Document 36 Filed 08/27/21 Page 3 of 7
3 2914005.2 116414-103161 When, however, the adverse party “fails to properly support an assertion of fact or fails to properly address another party’s assertion of fact as required by Rule 56(c)[,]” the court may “grant summary judgment if the motion and supporting materials--including the facts considered undisputed--show that the movant is entitled to it.” Fed R. Civ. P. 56(e)(3). “In an unopposed motion for summary judgment, plaintiff’s recitation of the facts is assumed to be true.” Universal TV Distribution Holdings LLC v. Walton, No. 03 CIV. 9133 (GBD), 2004 WL 2848528, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 9, 2004) (citations omitted); see Local Civil Rule 56.1(c) (“[e]ach numbered paragraph in the statement of material facts set forth in the statement required to be served by the moving party will be deemed to be admitted for purposes of the motion unless specifically controverted by a correspondingly numbered paragraph in the statement required to be served by the opposing party.”). Further, pursuant to Rule 56(c)(4), the adverse party “asserting that a fact cannot be or is genuinely disputed must support the assertion by [inter alia,] . . . [a]n affidavit or declaration used to support or oppose a motion must be made on personal knowledge, set out facts that would be admissible in evidence, and show that the affiant or declarant is competent to testify on the matters stated.” I.OWCP’s August 25, 2021 Letter Is Not Entitled To Any Weight On July 23, 2021, Discover moved for summary judgment requesting that the Court issue a permanent injunction against defendant OWCP, requiring it to become and remain current in its public filing obligations under the Securities Exchange Act, and take all actions necessary to timely and fully meet all of its obligations under the SPA and RRA. [ECF 27.] Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the parties agreed that OWCP file its opposition on August 25, 2021. [ECF 34.] However, on that date, OWCP’s counsel filed a two-page letter to “advise the Court” of certain purported events in response to Discovery’s motion for summary judgment (the “Letter”). [ECF 35.] The Letter should not be entitled to any weight because much of its contents are not based upon personal knowledge. Clerical Apparel of New York, Inc. v. Valley Forge Ins. Co., 209 F.R.D. 316, 319–20 (E.D.N.Y. 2002) (quoting Wyler v. United States, 725 F.2d 156, 160 (2d Cir.1983)); see also Rule 56(c)(4). Indeed, not only is defense counsel without personal knowledge of certain facts, but the Letter makes clear that so is OWCP management, stating that “Mr. Kugelman [and his counsel are] unfamiliar with much of the factual background that is relevant to Discover’s motion.” [ECF 35 at 1.] Accordingly, the main arguments contained in the Letter should be disregarded, including, inter alia: •Neither Mr. Kugelman nor OWCP’s counsel have knowledge concerning OWCP’s statements that the parties’ agreements are voidable because Discover allegedly engaged in securities fraud and acted as an unregistered dealer; •OWCP made reasonable efforts to comply with the Order by, inter alia, undertaking efforts to convene a stockholder meeting; and •OWCP will not be able to comply with the proposed injunction due to alleged financial difficulties1 and claimed resignation of Mr. Kugelman.2OWCP has failed to file any meaningful opposition to Discover’s motion for summary judgment and most importantly, it failed to file a Local Civil Rule 56.1 Counter Statement. As such, “the Court must assume that [OWCP] admits the material facts as stated in [Discover’s] 1In an attempt to avoid its contractual obligations, OWCP argues that “the reality of OWCP’s ... lack of funding, make full compliance with the proposed injunction virtually impossible.” [ECF 35 at 2.] The Court has already found that argument unavailing. Specifically, the Court granted Discover’s Preliminary Injunction [ECF 18], requiring OWCP to comply with its filing requirements, even though OWCP raised its purported financial problems in its Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for TRO and Preliminary Injunction. [ECF 12 at 3.] 2OWCP argues that its sole director, Mr. Kugelman, “has informed [OWCP’s counsel] that he will be resigning as director of OWCP.” As previously discussed, this statement is inadmissible evidence and cannot be relied upon in deciding Discover’s motion for summary judgment. But in any event, Mr. Kugelman’s purported resignation is reminiscent of OWCP’s former management who suggested that entry of the preliminary injunction could result in their resignations. [ECF 17 at 2.] As it turns out, far from resigning, OWCP’s former director, Ziv Turner, continued to serve in that position for nearly a year after the entry of the preliminary injunction and fought the February 2021 appointment of Mr. Kugelman as his replacement until April 2021.
Local Civil Rule 56.1 Statement.” Clerical Apparel of New York, Inc., 209 F.R.D. at 320. II.Based on the Record, Discover’s Motion Should Be Granted The Court should grant Discover’s motion for summary judgment because Discover has established that there are no material issues of fact and OWCP has conceded Discover’s undisputed statement of facts. Specifically, it is undisputed that the SPA and RRA expressly require OWCP to file public reports and to not take the steps that it has to cause its Common Stock to be delisted from the OTCQB market. [ECF 27 at 7.] Defendant does not contest that it has breached its clear contractual obligations. [ECF 35 at 2] It is also undisputed that OWCP’s defenses are without merit—Discover has not engaged in securities fraud and has not acted as an unregistered dealer. [ECF 27at 8-12.] CONCLUSION Based on the Court’s review of the undisputed facts and the case law submitted in Discover’s motion, Discover respectfully requests that the Court grant summary judgment and enter an order substantially in the form of the Proposed Order that Discover previously submitted [ECF 31]. Finally, because OWCP and its former directors have repeated their baseless accusations to the corporation’s stock transfer agent, Edgar filing agent, accountants and auditors, it is imperative that the Court’s order should further hold that the claims that Discover engaged in securities fraud and operated as an unregistered dealer are not supported by the evidence, and are not a valid ground to preclude Discover from obtaining and selling its stock.
Dated: New York, New York August 27, 2021
GIBBONS P.C. One Pennsylvania Plaza, 37th Floor New York, New York 10119-3701 (212) 613-2000
By: Paul A. Saso Paul A. Saso Attorneys for Plaintiff Discover Growth Fund LLCCase 1:20-cv-02857-AKH
Ziv's personal IR team claimed a hearing was held in July not February.
At that hearing, Turner would need to inform the court that he could not represent OWC Israel.
Without proof of the filing, no one here can be believed.
Why make claims without links to verifiable sources?
Steve Bannon has a top ranked political podcast on Apples list. Stew Peters has been tracking well behind him. They're truth seekers.
https://chartable.com/charts/itunes/us-politics-podcasts