NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[longfellow95]

NWBO did not disclose that the FDA had issued a hold until half a year later when it became available in Court documents.

So where is the reference?
It is well dodgy to assert that.

On 21 Aug '15, this is what they said:-

Over 300 patients have been recruited for the trial. The total anticipated enrollment is 348 patients.

The only change in status of the trial is that new screening of patient candidates for the trial has been temporarily suspended while the Company submits certain information from the trial for regulatory review.

Such screening involves the initial evaluation of patient candidates to determine whether they meet eligibility criteria for the trial (e.g., whether they are within the eligible age range, do not have certain viral diseases, etc.)

Some blogs and social media comments have noted that the EudraCT trials database in Europe states that there is a “Temporary Halt” of the trial in Germany. In actuality, the trial status in Germany is that the trial is ongoing as noted above, and the Company has only undertaken a temporary suspension of new screening.

The Company has sought to have the EudraCT listing corrected, but the database includes only certain pre-specified categories and there is no category that corresponds to a temporary suspension of new screening only, while a trial is ongoing.

The Company is in the process of preparing the trial information for regulatory review and anticipates submission within the next couple of weeks.

https://nwbio.com/nw-bio-confirms-phase-iii-trial-of-dcvax-l-for-gbm-brain-cancer-is-ongoing/

You're not suggesting the screening hold started 6 months earlier than Aug, are you. So they did PR a screening suspension at the time (or near the time). What you appear to be asserting is that they didn't say that it was the FDA that was the regulator, and they didn't say they received a clinical hold order.
I'm sure they did wait maybe a couple of weeks before doing that PR, because they hoped that they would be able to adequately address the issue of concern, without any further regulatory action.
We still don't know with any certainty, if and when they actually received an order.

Mind you, if you had said they were tardy in PR'ing the first round of SEC subpoenas, I wouldn't have disagreed.