InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 146
Posts 6483
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/17/2015

Re: pagosa post# 22980

Thursday, 02/06/2020 4:06:49 PM

Thursday, February 06, 2020 4:06:49 PM

Post# of 32156
Forget about that part for now, what really needs some explaining:

Why again was the former employee and the company he went to go work for, that was a part of case number 119907606 in 2014, removed from the case by 10/10/2018? https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=153671514

And again, if nothing to hide, why did TRUSYS change their registered agent, for the first time in company history, to a LAW FIRM 2 MONTHS AFTER the summary judgement, requested by the named defendants, delayed three times, and then lost? https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=153291971

Feel free to check that company out. And perhaps check out who bought Proximex? The technology part of the case is all TBD which will all get more exposure in COURT, DISTRICT COURT.

Go SECI. It will be really interesting to see how this all plays out. THE COURTS ARE IN CHARGE. LET THEM DO THEIR THANG! :)


My posts are my opinion and not a recommendation. Always do your own DD.