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.
A dismissal by stipulation is a dismissal without prejudice unless the parties otherwise agree and record their agreement in the text of the stipulation. I agree! if one were to "Read, Read, Read" the court filing they will see that this case was not a stipulated dismissal WITHOUT prejudice.....but rather a stipulated dismissal WITH prejudice, which means BOTH PARTIES AGREED to it! Otherwise, the case would not have been dismissed. There is a difference between a case being dismissed with prejudice, and without. I will also address the summary judgement your earlier post was speaking to a little bit later.
$SECI NICE......I never saw that before. Thanks for sharing.
It looked like we were in the beginning of a run on Fri.....Monday will be interesting. More chatter picking up as to what is truly going on.....$SECI.
SECI.....news is coming for sure.
Exactly.....Go $SECI.
Ah yes.....I made good coin on that one. I held the preferred shares and sold at just the right time. I probably read all of the same court docs you did LOL. I think $SECI will be a bigger play than Wamu was. In a nutshell, many companies profited off of Sector 10's technology. For all we know, any number of them may have chipped in on the final settlement. We are simply waiting to know the details. Anything right now is just speculation until we hear from the company. Could come next week.
"A chart.....or whatever the inference is has no meaning whatsoever". This is not a chart LOL. Here is the meaning.....I know the difference between a chart and a simple security details/share structure update. Kind of like the same way I interpret $SECI's court filings for what they actually mean. An expert market stock bothers to update details/share structure near the same time the court case was dismissed in which they "lost everything"? LOL does that sound right? I don't think so. News coming....
SECI Security Details/Share Structure Updated on 10/30/20 https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/SECI/security
I am happy to help guys.....go $SECI.
Respectfully, there are a few problems with that interpretation of the court filings. First....the "settlement conference" your post refers to is AKA the pre-trial conference, which was CANCELLED. The 4 day bench trial was also cancelled. Reason: Case was SETTLED. The Judge in this case did not....and would not have taken it upon herself to dismiss the case with prejudice prior to the pre-trial conference and 4 day bench trial in which all evidence would be heard. It just does not work that way. It was the defendant who filed a STIPULATED MOTION TO DISMISS (which followed the motion from the plaintiff to classify all documents as private being granted by the Judge.....THIS WAS THE SETTLEMENT). In a "stipulated motion to dismiss" BOTH the PLAINTIFF and the DEFENDANT must agree to the motion for the Judge to NOT issue a judgement AGAINST THE DEFENDANT. Thus, the Judge did not make any ruling here, both parties themselves agreed to the motion to dismiss. Why? Settlement. I have been through many of these kinds of cases. The legalese to me is like reading the morning newspaper. Shareholders WILL see SETTLEMENT.....and it will be substantially higher than where we are now.
Why, did he lie to the court? Oh....no, that's right. THAT was the defendants. Funny how Dutro felt the need to lie in court and perjure themselves in court over a small contract dispute in which they were the ones owed money and the court is in their favor, as some are suggesting LOL.
Give me a break.....they have spent 10 years suing Dutro just so they can change the terms of a contract of money THEY OWE THEM? That is quite a summary of the lawsuit. Quite a summary, indeed.
Because Sector 10 is the plaintiff in this case. WE THE SHAREHOLDERS ARE SECTOR 10, INC. It is basic common knowledge.....or at least it should be by now.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=159062537 it's what your post said.....not me. That the court gutted IP malfeasance. That would mean in essence, they were cleared of any wrongdoing pertaining to IP. WOW.
If the defendants had been cleared of any wrongdoing in an official legal document.....i'm sure a few on here would have been posting that every single day. Maybe someone dreamt it?
Nope....not even close.
LOL....I am invested here heavily. I have been doing this for years and have read more than my share of filings in court cases ranging from IP disputes to bankruptcies. That includes the filings in the Sector 10 case. I do not recall any official court document clearing the defendants of any wrongdoing with IP theft. You were the one who made the statement, all I am asking is for you to prove it. Why not post the link? Maybe because no such link exists?
Most definitely, agree 100%.
Respectfully, I have never seen any facts in your posts (like links to filings) only opinion. If the defendants had been cleared of any wrongdoing as it pertains to IP.....there would be filings that show that and I would have seen it. If I am wrong....prove me wrong and post an official document that shows the defendants were cleared.
"The court already gutted the so-called case from any and all claims of IP malfeasance"........that's funny.....I do not recall the courts ever doing any such thing. Link?
All of those poor bagholders holding from .70 to $45.00......ROFLMAO. I will feel even more sorry for them when this goes to $thousands per share.
I think we are getting close.....
I have not set a target. I must know more about what entity is reverse merging. Once I have that info.....I will know where to set my sells.
Agree....but we ain't seen nothing yet....big things coming IMO.
The chance is always there, but with CERPQ's share structure if we did most likely it would be a tiny one, if at all.
Sounds good to me.....i'm loaded up so as far as I am concerned, they can drop the news any time.
That's the time to accumulate.....
I like it quiet....
That is incorrect....
Not that funny, actually. Weimin Sun was not the CEO for the time period of the last filed quarterly. Look for his name on the next filing, sport.
Good read https://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201909/30/WS5d915d82a310cf3e3556e477.html This is why I believe that THIS is our Weimin Sun. Suning Holdings Group, China's largest omnichannel retailer by sales revenue, plans to continue consolidating it's global presence via mergers and acquisitions (M&A) and cross-border partnerships.
I have already ruled that Weimin Sun out. He has worked in the financial industry for 20 years, and while he knows alot about the blockchain financial sector and has authored books.....I do not see anywhere that he is a part of any company, such as a blockchain startup.This Weimin Sun is an American, living in New Jersey, I think it was. David Lazar is known for Chinese reverse mergers. From the DD I have done.....Suning is looking to expand to U.S. markets and is doing many acquisitions Also, Alibaba is an investor in Suning.... and alibaba has had a history of getting compenies they are invested in to go the reverse merger route, as opposed to IPO.
I think the best advice I could give to you is to simply tell you to study the basics of how a reverse merger works and why companies do them. GLTY
Bankruptcy discharge removes the bankruptcy... leaving an empty shell which David Lazar then took custodianship of to look for a reverse merger deal. This shell no longer has any connection to the old company. No debt, no liabilities. Nothing from the old company will transfer to whatever new company merges in. This shell is a vehicle for a new company to trade on the public market. Nothing more, nothing less.
Very quiet around here.....i've been accumulating.