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.
You need original signatures for contracts. Etc.
She does seem like a scorned bitter women.
BS, you are just parroting that lunatic Connie. Your opinion is meaningless. Those signatures are exactly the same.
And yet the case management conference is scheduled for the Fall, and the case moves forward. Attia’s lawyers did show.
On May 22, 2014, MAXD entered into a representation agreement with architect Eli Attia giving MAXD the exclusive rights to sue violators of Eli Attia’s intellectual property rights. While Eli Attia was teaching his invention at Google [x], the project was internally valued by Google at $120 Billion USD a year. Since then, Flux has since been spun-out of Google [x], funded and has quickly growing, upon information and belief, to over 800 employees according to one of its founders. MAXD, on behalf of Attia’s, have since filed suit against Google, Inc., Flux Factory, and various executives of these companies for misappropriation of trade secrets. Since this time, the Company has advanced the case(s) and has signed additional agreements with the inventor as late
MAXD has recently signed 3 revenue deals and more are coming. Did you not read the releases?
But by Googles admission, it is worth 120 billion a year. MAXD has finally signed 3 deals, with more in the works,so next filing will show revenue. What part of this do you not understand?
No, brand new account. You know what that means. He has sent me a few dm’s and they were pathetic.
What is avers? Google is a corrupt company that has stolen MAXD’s technology. I feel great as I am up several hundred thousand dollars on my MAXD investment.
The reports of shorting in penny land are bs. Many short sales are not reported. All well documented.
Signed 3 deals in March and more are on the way.
Standard language for a company at this stage.
The note is owned by one guy, I don’t see him converting.
Per the filings and their partial ownership of ODT and maxd agreement with Attia.
“And the potential to profit from in the,future.”
To further clarify MAXD’s current role in the Attia and ODT legal matters described above, the Company is not a party to any of these legal cases that it has an interest in and the potential to profit from in the future. The Company has brought together IP rights holders since 2014 with both Contingency Law Firms and Litigation Financed Law Firms to create the enforcement of Intellectual Property rights holders with cases currently addressing Patent Infringement, Trade Secret Theft, Breach of Contract and Racketeering (“RICO”). MAXD has secured the potential to profit therefrom, as the power of attorney, to negotiate and approve a final financial deal with Google on behalf of the rights holders as either settlements or licensing arrangements both of which have been in and out of negotiations for the past six years. Halpern recently was quoted, "There are many more cases that will be filed against Anti-trust Monopoly Google for its bad-business-practices for the past decade ultimately going forward until they change their worst-in-class, anti-American approach to inventors. Samsung recently called them the most dishonest company in history. Eight years ago, Google never had heard of little MAX-D. Now, they wish they'd never heard of us. Next up is a few trillion dollars more of exposure to theft where the courts have just looked the other way. While we are finally able to build our business successfully around Google's premeditated thefts, their judicial manipulation and total lack of any ethical standard, MAX-D will never bow down until Google is forced to pay."
MAXD is part owner of ODT. How many times do you need to be told this. MaxD has an agreement with Attia as well.
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/11/29/1078672/0/en/Max-Sound-Corp-and-Vedanti-Systems-Limited-Enter-A-Strategic-Partnership-As-Co-Owners-Of-ODT-Patents.html
On May 22, 2014, MAXD entered into a representation agreement with architect Eli Attia giving MAXD the exclusive rights to sue violators of Eli Attia’s intellectual property rights. While Eli Attia was teaching his invention at Google [x], the project was internally valued by Google at $120 Billion USD a year. Its subsidiary Flux has since been spun-out of Google [x], funded and has quickly grown, into a massive enterprise and industry leader according to its CEO. MAXD secured additional council on behalf of Attia, to file suits against Google, Inc., Flux Factory and various executives of these companies for misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of contract and RICO.
On December 5, 2014, the Company, along with renowned architect Eli Attia, filed a lawsuit in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, against Google, its co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, Google’s spinoff company Flux Factory, and senior executives of Flux. Plaintiffs’ sued for misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of contract and other contract-related claims, breach of confidence, slander of title, violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law (California Business and Professionals Code §§ 17200 et seq.), and fraud, and also a claim for declaratory relief. The lawsuit acuses that Google and the other Defendants stole Mr. Attia’s trade secrets, proprietary information, and know-how regarding a revolutionary architecture design and building process that he alone had invented, known as Engineered Architecture. Defendants are alleged to have engaged Mr. Attia in 2010 and 2011 to translate his architectural technology into software for a proof of concept, with the goal of determining at that point whether to continue with full-scale development with Mr. Attia. Instead, the lawsuit claims that once Mr. Attia had disclosed the trade secrets and proprietary information Defendants needed to bring the technology to market, they severed ties with Mr. Attia, and continued to use his technology without a license and without compensation, in order to bring the technology to market themselves. Plaintiffs seek a permanent injunction against Google, damages (including punitive damages), and restitution. As exclusive agent to Eli Attia to enforce all rights with respect to the subject technology, the Company retained Buether Joe & Carpenter LLC to represent the Company in the suit, on a contingency fee basis. The case has been vigorously prosecuted, and the Company believes there is a good likelihood of success. Defendants filed multiple demurrers to the complaint, and the Court issued orders allowing the case to proceed. Defendants filed another demurrer on March 17, 2016, which was denied by the Court on August 12, 2016.
On March 1, 2017, at Google's request, Max Sound Management met with Google Representatives to mediate the Attia matter. At the end of the day, no settlement agreement was reached and Max Sound agreed to leave the mediation negotiations open while the case continued.
On October 4, 2017, the Court granted Mr. Attia leave to amend the complaint to add causes of action against defendants for civil violations of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (commonly known as RICO). Subsequently, on October 23, 2017, the defendants removed the lawsuit from California state court to the federal district court in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. In February 2019, that court gave a dismissal without prejudice, and an appeal was filed the same year.
On October 23, 2017, the Defendants exercised their right to move the lawsuit from Santa Clara County Superior Court to the Federal District Court in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. The Trade Secret Theft and Misappropriation case was remanded to the Santa Clara County Superior Court on March 19, 2019, which based on the historical record, the Company believes would provide the most non-biased opportunity for Attia to finally receive justice in the matter. A Jury Trial has been set for October 28, 2020, a historical precedent as Google has nearly a thousand lawyers and small plaintiffs rarely reach this stage in any action against them. It is especially encouraging at
4
a time when public opinion of Google has been declining and the Company is confident that the truth is only on the side of the Plaintiff. The Company assisted with research and information gathering services in the
matter, and while it is not a party to the case, it holds the exclusive rights to negotiate a licensing and/or settlement agreement with the Defendants on the Plaintiff’s behalf.
In 2011, when Google’s annual sales were reported at $39.7 Billion dollars, Larry Page and Sergy Brin its founders approved an Executive Summary that stated that Mr. Attia’s technology was worth $120 Billion dollars annually to Google.
On March 13, 2020, Google’s motion to Show Cause was Denied by the Superior Court, as to Max Sound’s role and rights to settle the Attia matter against Google. This eliminated Google’s endless efforts to distract the court and its resources from its actual theft of Attia’s life work in the multi-trillion-dollar Architecture, Engineering and Construction Industry (AEC).
The RICO case has been appealed in 2019 and is being argued and spearheaded by John E. Floyd, the leading authority on RICO in all fifty states. Mr. Floyd’s illustrious career has made him the go-to attorney for most district and states attorneys seeking to file RICO cases. Mr. Floyd is the protégé of G. Robert Blakey, the creator of the original RICO statute and the co-author of the Attia’s initial RICO suit against Google and the founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin as well as Google X CEO Astro Teller, Sebastian Thrun, and Flux Factory with its falsely claimed co-inventors Nicholas Chim, Jennifer Carlile, Michelle Kaufmann, Augusto Roman and Astro Teller.
In the appealed RICO opening brief, Mr. Floyd makes the following points as part of his argument, “The district court erred in finding that “Plaintiffs’ continued use theory fails as a matter of law.” Plaintiffs have statutory standing to assert their DTSA (Defend Trade Secrets Act) claim based on Google and Flux’s unauthorized use of Plaintiffs’ trade secret information after May 11, 2016, notwithstanding Google’s wrongful publication of Plaintiffs’ trade secrets in 2012.
“Plaintiffs have statutory standing to assert their RICO claims based on those allegations, notwithstanding Google’s publication of Plaintiffs’ trade secrets in 2012. *Defendants Are Estopped From Invoking Google’s Wrongful Publication of Plaintiffs’ Trade Secrets as a Defense to Plaintiffs’ DTSA and RICO Claims.”
“The district court misapplied the law in each of its rulings. The court’s statutory standing finding was premised on an unduly restrictive reading of the DTSA and 18 U.S.C. § 1832 that actually protects—indeed, rewards—the most egregious trade secret mis-appropriators — those who, like Google, steal and then extinguish trade secrets altogether by wrongfully publishing them. Neither the DTSA nor § 1832, however, can be construed in such a self-defeating manner. And in any event, Google and Flux are equitably estopped from invoking Google’s wrongful publication of Plaintiffs’ trade secrets to evade liability under either the DTSA or RICO.”
Nice try, Halpern has nothing to do with this company. The website that says he does is open and is not a good source, Arman Tabatabaei is Founder and Chairman of CBGL. We must be over the target, some of these posts are out of desperation.
https://cannabisglobalinc.com/management/
Board
Our Team
Arman Tabatabaei
Arman Tabatabaei
CEO & Chairman
Mr. Tabatabaei is a founder and Chairman of Cannabis Global with over 17 years of management and operations experience, he has earned a strong reputation for a numbers-based analytical approach to the management of organizations. An expert at data collection and analysis relative to resource management, risk forecasting and profit and loss management, he has made significant progress in revamping operations of several companies over the past few years.
Most recently, Mr. Tabatabaei has consulted with Cannabis Strategic Ventures (OTCQB:NUGS) on various growth initiatives relative to both cannabis cultivation and the organization of new hemp-related retail operations. At Sugarmade, Inc., (OTCQB:SGMD) he has been instrumental in revamping various operations relative to the Company’s hydroponic growth supplies initiatives.
Previously, he consulted with large corporations to create supply chain efficiencies using mathematical models and software such as JPM, SPSS and Minitab. Arman is also well versed in the retail industry after having started and successfully selling several retail establishments.
Mr. Tabatabaei possesses a Master of
THERE ARE LAWSUITS AGAINST GOOGLE
MAXD IS A CO OWNER OF ODT PATENTS AND THEY ARE BEING LITIGATED
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/11/29/1078672/0/en/Max-Sound-Corp-and-Vedanti-Systems-Limited-Enter-A-Strategic-Partnership-As-Co-Owners-Of-ODT-Patents.html
MAXD HAS AN AGREEMENT WITH VSL COMMUNICATIONS TO ENFORCE.
In Q2 of 2014, MAXD entered into an exclusive representation agreement with VSL Communications, Inc., making MAXD the sole representative to VSL to enforce its rights with respect to patented technology owned and controlled by VSL at the time. The Company announced that it had acquired the license and representation rights to VSL’s patented video and data technology known as “Optimized Data Transmission System and Method” (ODT) which enables end-user licensees to transport 100% of data bandwidth content in only 3% of the bandwidth with the identical lossless quality. Significantly, this represented a thirty-three times reduction associated with transport cost and the time it takes for the video or digital content to be delivered to and viewed by the end-user. As described more fully in the Legal Proceedings Section, In Q3 of 2014, the Company filed suit against Google, Inc., YouTube, LLC, and On2 Technologies, Inc., alleging willful infringement of the ODT patent stemming from spending the bulk of 2010 learning all about ODT technology while under non-disclosure with VSL. The lawsuit further alleged that soon after Google and VSL initiated negotiations, Google willfully infringed the ODT patent by incorporating it into Google's own VP8, VP9, WebM, YouTube, Google Adsense, Google Play, Google TV, Chromebook, Google Drive, Google Chromecast, Google Play-per-view, Google Glasses, Google+, Google’s Simplify, Google Maps, and Google Earth, without compensating for such use. On May 13, 2015 Google's “motion to dismiss” was denied by the Northern District of California court in a seven-page order, stating that Max Sound had sufficiently alleged the existence and validity of the '339 Patent which led to serious negotiations for a significant settlement between the parties. However, due to numerous new demands by the ODT inventor, and their significant interference with the Company’s ownership rights, on November 24, 2015, the court granted a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on the defendants’ argument that the agreements between the Company and VSL did not clearly give the Company standing to enforce the patent rights. The Company appealed that decision on February 22, 2016. One January 18, 2017 the Company received a notice from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals that affirmed the order of the District Court dismissing MAXD's patent infringement lawsuit against Google for lack of standing. The Court did not issue a written decision explaining its reasoning or that the Company's arguments were not correct; however, VSL’s inventor then sold its Patent Rights to a new owner and the Company then became co-owners with the strategy to re-file a new lawsuit together with the new owner against Google. The Court also issued an order denying Google's motion arguing that the Company's appeal should be dismissed as moot. On September 25, 2017, the Court issued an order that the Company should reimburse defendants
3
for its attorneys’ fees in the amount of $820,321.41. The award was illegally granted in-camera without due process and during the appeal was called out as absurd given that the parties hadn’t even reached discovery and no proof of time spent was required by Judge Edward Davila who also had an equity interest in Google at the time. The Company was informed by counsel that the Order for fees was without merit and appealed but was told at the hearing that Google would lose the appeal if the Company had not committed Waiver. After an excessively long delay by the Federal Appeals Court to hear the case so it could be combined with another case vs Google challenging the patent and using the same Tribunal with the sole intention to harm the Company, and continue to allow Google to steal and destroy the ODT Patent while profiting from it as a key component of its business, the Appeal was finally heard and the Company lost with no reasonable explanation and with the corrupt Tribunal simply rubber stamping both cases “Affirmed. See Fed Rule 36”, which is not only a violation of the Company’s Constitutional Rights, it is known to mean by intellectual property professionals representing small companies and inventors, that the courts won’t even look at the facts because then they would have to consider the actual law that would protect small businesses and the inventors affiliated with them. The Company is exploring additional rights it may have in both cases with its ongoing battle against Judicial Corruption. Since year end 2018, the Company has recorded the judgement payable on the balance sheet and in Q1 of 2020 the Company’s founder has filed a suit against Google, the ODT Inventor (for Conspiring with Google to harm the Company’s rights of the 339 patent) and the same suit also names Charles Graves (the lead attorney for Google) for Libel, Slander of Title and Business Interference among other claims.
MAXD IS REPRESENTING ELI ATTIA
On May 22, 2014, MAXD entered into a representation agreement with architect Eli Attia giving MAXD the exclusive rights to sue violators of Eli Attia’s intellectual property rights. While Eli Attia was teaching his invention at Google [x], the project was internally valued by Google at $120 Billion USD a year. Its subsidiary Flux has since been spun-out of Google [x], funded and has quickly grown, into a massive enterprise and industry leader according to its CEO. MAXD secured additional council on behalf of Attia, to file suits against Google, Inc., Flux Factory and various executives of these companies for misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of contract and RICO.
On December 5, 2014, the Company, along with renowned architect Eli Attia, filed a lawsuit in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, against Google, its co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, Google’s spinoff company Flux Factory, and senior executives of Flux. Plaintiffs’ sued for misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of contract and other contract-related claims, breach of confidence, slander of title, violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law (California Business and Professionals Code §§ 17200 et seq.), and fraud, and also a claim for declaratory relief. The lawsuit acuses that Google and the other Defendants stole Mr. Attia’s trade secrets, proprietary information, and know-how regarding a revolutionary architecture design and building process that he alone had invented, known as Engineered Architecture. Defendants are alleged to have engaged Mr. Attia in 2010 and 2011 to translate his architectural technology into software for a proof of concept, with the goal of determining at that point whether to continue with full-scale development with Mr. Attia. Instead, the lawsuit claims that once Mr. Attia had disclosed the trade secrets and proprietary information Defendants needed to bring the technology to market, they severed ties with Mr. Attia, and continued to use his technology without a license and without compensation, in order to bring the technology to market themselves. Plaintiffs seek a permanent injunction against Google, damages (including punitive damages), and restitution. As exclusive agent to Eli Attia to enforce all rights with respect to the subject technology, the Company retained Buether Joe & Carpenter LLC to represent the Company in the suit, on a contingency fee basis. The case has been vigorously prosecuted, and the Company believes there is a good likelihood of success. Defendants filed multiple demurrers to the complaint, and the Court issued orders allowing the case to proceed. Defendants filed another demurrer on March 17, 2016, which was denied by the Court on August 12, 2016.
On March 1, 2017, at Google's request, Max Sound Management met with Google Representatives to mediate the Attia matter. At the end of the day, no settlement agreement was reached and Max Sound agreed to leave the mediation negotiations open while the case continued.
On October 4, 2017, the Court granted Mr. Attia leave to amend the complaint to add causes of action against defendants for civil violations of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (commonly known as RICO). Subsequently, on October 23, 2017, the defendants removed the lawsuit from California state court to the federal district court in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. In February 2019, that court gave a dismissal without prejudice, and an appeal was filed the same year.
On October 23, 2017, the Defendants exercised their right to move the lawsuit from Santa Clara County Superior Court to the Federal District Court in the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. The Trade Secret Theft and Misappropriation case was remanded to the Santa Clara County Superior Court on March 19, 2019, which based on the historical record, the Company believes would provide the most non-biased opportunity for Attia to finally receive justice in the matter. A Jury Trial has been set for October 28, 2020, a historical precedent as Google has nearly a thousand lawyers and small plaintiffs rarely reach this stage in any action against them. It is especially encouraging at
4
a time when public opinion of Google has been declining and the Company is confident that the truth is only on the side of the Plaintiff. The Company assisted with research and information gathering services in the
matter, and while it is not a party to the case, it holds the exclusive rights to negotiate a licensing and/or settlement agreement with the Defendants on the Plaintiff’s behalf.
In 2011, when Google’s annual sales were reported at $39.7 Billion dollars, Larry Page and Sergy Brin its founders approved an Executive Summary that stated that Mr. Attia’s technology was worth $120 Billion dollars annually to Google.
On March 13, 2020, Google’s motion to Show Cause was Denied by the Superior Court, as to Max Sound’s role and rights to settle the Attia matter against Google. This eliminated Google’s endless efforts to distract the court and its resources from its actual theft of Attia’s life work in the multi-trillion-dollar Architecture, Engineering and Construction Industry (AEC).
The RICO case has been appealed in 2019 and is being argued and spearheaded by John E. Floyd, the leading authority on RICO in all fifty states. Mr. Floyd’s illustrious career has made him the go-to attorney for most district and states attorneys seeking to file RICO cases. Mr. Floyd is the protégé of G. Robert Blakey, the creator of the original RICO statute and the co-author of the Attia’s initial RICO suit against Google and the founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin as well as Google X CEO Astro Teller, Sebastian Thrun, and Flux Factory with its falsely claimed co-inventors Nicholas Chim, Jennifer Carlile, Michelle Kaufmann, Augusto Roman and Astro Teller.
In the appealed RICO opening brief, Mr. Floyd makes the following points as part of his argument, “The district court erred in finding that “Plaintiffs’ continued use theory fails as a matter of law.” Plaintiffs have statutory standing to assert their DTSA (Defend Trade Secrets Act) claim based on Google and Flux’s unauthorized use of Plaintiffs’ trade secret information after May 11, 2016, notwithstanding Google’s wrongful publication of Plaintiffs’ trade secrets in 2012.
“Plaintiffs have statutory standing to assert their RICO claims based on those allegations, notwithstanding Google’s publication of Plaintiffs’ trade secrets in 2012. *Defendants Are Estopped From Invoking Google’s Wrongful Publication of Plaintiffs’ Trade Secrets as a Defense to Plaintiffs’ DTSA and RICO Claims.”
“The district court misapplied the law in each of its rulings. The court’s statutory standing finding was premised on an unduly restrictive reading of the DTSA and 18 U.S.C. § 1832 that actually protects—indeed, rewards—the most egregious trade secret mis-appropriators — those who, like Google, steal and then extinguish trade secrets altogether by wrongfully publishing them. Neither the DTSA nor § 1832, however, can be construed in such a self-defeating manner. And in any event, Google and Flux are equitably estopped from invoking Google’s wrongful publication of Plaintiffs’ trade secrets to evade liability under either the DTSA or RICO.”
“The Predicate Acts Alleged in the Fifth Amended Complaint Are Sufficiently Related. Most critically, during each of these predicate offenses, all of the individual Defendants knew that the information being possessed and communicated was derived from Plaintiffs’ trade secrets, as explained above. Thus, the Fifth Amended Complaint offers enough facts to at least plausibly suggest that the individual Defendants knowingly participated in all of those predicate offenses. As a result, Plaintiffs sufficiently alleged a RICO conspiracy claim against all of the Defendants.”
[color=red][color=red][/color][/color]
Two Revenue deals, more deals coming, Google lawsuit, biometric Audio security patent. All good in MAXD land.
There are many with a vested interest that MAXD stock does not take off, it is starting to look like it will.
No, the filings say GH gets 24k per month. Wrong again.
They just signed two revenue deals and more deals are on the way. You know that.
Wrong, you are citing the inactive case. MAXD is clearly a Plaintiff as they are listed on the active case.
2014-1-CV-274103
Attia, et al. v. Google, Inc., et al.
CASE INFO
PARTIES
EVENTS
HEARINGS
OTHER DOCS
PRINTABLE
PARTIES
Show entries
Search:
Type First Name Middle Name Last Name
Defendant Google, Inc.
Defendant Flux Factory, Inc.
Defendant Larry Page
Defendant Sergey Brin
Defendant Sebastian Thrun
Defendant Eric "Astro" Teller
Defendant Michelle Kaufmann
Defendant Jennifer Carlile
Defendant Augusto Roman
Defendant Nicholas Chim
Defendant Google, Inc.
Interested Party Robert L. Wood
Interested Party Robert L. Wood
Judgment Creditor Google, LLC
Other Superior Court of California County of Santa Clara
Plaintiff Max Sound Corporation
Plaintiff Eli Attia
Plaintiff Eli Attia Architect PC
Plaintiff Eli Attia Architect PC
Plaintiff Eli Attia Architect PC
Plaintiff Eli Attia Architect PC
Plaintiff Eli Attia Architect PC
This Form 10-K/A does not reflect events occurring after the filing of the Form 10-K or modify or update any related or other disclosures other than those listed above.
The amendment was COVID related and did not take out the reference to the agreement.
Maxd D is power of attorney and gets 50%. You know that.
In the penny world there is a great deal of counterfeiting and not reporting failure to deliver.
Shaq owns 10% of the company.
I have heard that there are more deals to come. So now, we may have a solid business model and the lawsuits. Time will tell, but the risk that I took a couple years ago, is paying off nicely.
If you look at the MAXD filings, MAXD has power of attorney and a 50% split with ATTIA.
60 billion market cap. I doubt that.
On May 22, 2014, MAXD entered into a representation agreement with architect Eli Attia giving MAXD the exclusive rights to sue violators of Eli Attia’s intellectual property rights. While Eli Attia was teaching his invention at Google [x], the project was internally valued by Google at $120 Billion USD a year. Its subsidiary Flux has since been spun-out of Google [x], funded and has quickly grown, into a massive enterprise and industry leader according to its CEO. MAXD secured additional council on behalf of Attia, to file suits against Google, Inc., Flux Factory and various executives of these companies for misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of contract and RICO."
"On March 13, 2020, Google’s motion to Show Cause was Denied by the Superior Court, as to Max Sound’s role and rights to settle the Attia matter against Google. This eliminated Google’s endless efforts to distract the court and its resources from its actual theft of Attia’s life work in the multi-trillion-dollar Architecture, Engineering and Construction Industry (AEC)."
" the Court fully Denied Google’s Motion to Show Cause about Max Sound’s involvement in the case, and the Judge stated on the record that it was clear the Company had rights and warned that if Max Sound is prevented from appearing for any reason at the Mandatory Settlement Conference in Summer of 2020, there would be the real risk of him handing out contempt proceedings to any responsible parties."
Well GME’s short position was rumored to be more than os. In the penny world, they short them to bankruptcy or a symbol change.
I did see that. It is very interesting the amount of disinformation that is out there regarding this little penny stock. It makes me wonder if Halpern is telling the truth regarding the short position.
Read Jeremy Hartman tweet.
This is one of the lawsuits to prove it's not a lie. It was scheduled for this month, but the court moved the date nothing negative from the company. $MAXD also getting some audio stuff finished up and should hear about some good contracts to come from it. pic.twitter.com/46AwnTy4nM
— Jeremy Hartman (@otcrookie1) February 23, 2021
Maxd will get a third of the settlement from what I understand and MAXD has 6.5 billion shares out. At 1 times cash you are looking at just over a buck.
Don’t know
True, I have no idea what the amount will be or if there will be a reasonable settlement. The speculation in the stock is based on that what if. The stock still goes to roughly .50 on the speculative settlement of 10billion. We will see how this plays out.
Well anyone that actually thinks google will ever pay 120 billion is nuts. I have seen several patent litigation cases and that number is unreasonable. MAXD is suing for 120 billion, but a 10 billion settlement would theoretically make the share price a $1.30 or so. I do know that google has made an offer and maxd turned it down.
No, I think it is what recently happened in court. I heard that Google offered to settle and MAXD turned it down. I also heard that Google is now requesting mediation. The mediation request certainly does not admit guilt, but I think google is going to have to pay. I also did hear that the judge said during the trial, this is a clear case of the big guy killing the little guy. I heard none of this from GH. GH has always said, he had proof that there were a lot of naked shorts out there and some day they would get squeezed. This could be it, but who knows. I have not seen any pumping on this, but I am not actively looking at that. I would imagine the volume and the spike does have some of the chat sites talking.
The statement as I understand it and can not verify was made in the courtroom. We will see how this turns out. I don’t dispute what you have said about the cases, I will say that I have heard some pretty interesting explanations and the truth or falseness of these explanations will play out.