StihlsawsRule Tuesday, 02/26/19 02:01:12 PM Re: Greensprint post# 745 Post # of 753 Thank you for posting the filing page. Im not sure that's a request by the Trustee to withdraw the entire STG CH 7 case, although it sure as hell should be. The judge (Kindred) is clearly conflicted. She worked for STGs (debtors) counsel (Ramsdell). HOW ITF is that even allowed under the code? I don't have standing to file anything here, but a big sharedholder or creditor should object to this sham and at the very least demand a change of venue. Should be a MOTION TO DISMISS, demanding a fair and transparent sale of STG and a reversal of the shady deal with SOSi. So Lacomb and the other STG gurus 'sold' STG to SOSi for (as far as we can tell) $83 million. As we were told again 'just barely enough to pay the outstanding debt.' Again, if we believe STG higher ups. The process was never transparent, STG would not give shareholders any information upon request. If it was 'enough' to pay all the debt, why the need for a post facto chapter 7? Just put the clean shell up for sale IMO. Its unreal that a government contractor was/is allowed to pull this sht while still under several contracts. Still just my opinion but if anything gets filed demanding a dismissal or change or venue, STGGQ stock should skyrocket. Only 16m shares, that's not a lot.