Monday, September 09, 2019 3:03:50 AM
There is no evidence of Rontan requesting in writing or otherwise for 3.1.11 to be removed or suspended.
An argument by Rontan that GDSI could not waive conditions without putting it in writing appears to be inaccurate.
There is a better chance that GDSI prevails than not. The MTD that was granted without prejudice, was not a ruling on the merits of the case and the FAC was submitted to resolve what appears to have been a procedural issue.
IMO. The judge wanted a better explanation of the relief being sought and the grounds for granting such relief. These are procedural issues, are not uncommon and are not issues of/on merit. The judge here appears to find merit to the complaint. Had there been a finding of NO MERIT the judge would have granted the MTD WITH prejudice and this case would have ended.
Looking forward to the settlement.
ILUS Provides an Update on the Binding Term Sheet Signed with Actelis Networks (NASDAQ: ASNS) • ILUS • May 31, 2024 12:52 PM
Element79 Gold To Provide Summary and Update on Active Exploration Program, Community Relations at RMEC on June 4 • ELEM • May 30, 2024 1:18 PM
Branded Legacy Secures Exclusive Extraction Partnership with One of the World's Largest Kava Distributors and Producers • BLEG • May 30, 2024 8:30 AM
ECGI Holdings, Inc. Announces $2 Million Debt-to-Equity Conversion • ECGI • May 30, 2024 8:30 AM
North Bay Resources Reports Assays up to >25% Mg, 0.1% Ni, 0.1% Cu, 0.01% Co, 0.3 ppm Pt at Tulameen Platinum Project, British Columbia • NBRI • May 29, 2024 9:03 AM
One World Products, Inc. Issues Shareholder Update • OWPC • May 29, 2024 8:20 AM