Hemp Inc (HEMP)

[worldisfullofDerps]

The entire document is 52 pages long, and, unless you would like to direct me to the right LINK, has NEVER been posted in its entirety on this board or elsewhere, expect PACER...

And I have the docket.

Actually, only need last two pages, line 9, page 51, "CONCLUSION" which states:

The SEC’s Motions for Sanctions (ECF Nos. 92, 97) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The SEC’s request for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

The SEC’s Motions for Sanctions (ECF Nos. 92, 97) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The SEC’s request for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

The SEC’s Motions for Sanctions (ECF Nos. 92, 97) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The SEC’s request for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

The SEC’s Motions for Sanctions (ECF Nos. 92, 97) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The SEC’s request for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

The SEC’s Motions for Sanctions (ECF Nos. 92, 97) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The SEC’s request for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

The SEC’s Motions for Sanctions (ECF Nos. 92, 97) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The SEC’s request for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

The SEC’s Motions for Sanctions (ECF Nos. 92, 97) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The SEC’s request for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

The SEC’s Motions for Sanctions (ECF Nos. 92, 97) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The SEC’s request for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

The SEC’s Motions for Sanctions (ECF Nos. 92, 97) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The SEC’s request for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

All that other copy/paste BS straight from SEC's section of sanctions motions is going to be, for obvious reasons, heavily skewed and biased to what SEC feels needs to happen. Thankfully, the Court has more common sense, and therefore did DENIED terminating sanctions.