Enzolytics Inc (ENZC)

[foxi]

One thought I keep having is that Savov mistook patent ownership with an exclusive distribution deal set up thru IMMB for the subsidiary IMMB BG. ie he 'thinks' he has patent ownership when he may indeed only make a claim to exclusive distribution rights. Harry's family trust is clearly listed by itself on the patent!

Savov claims here and here that he has a 51% stake in IMMB BG and a 15% stake in IMMB. A 51% stake would probably come with a controlling signature when entering or revoking agreements so if this is true, Savov might have to sign off on ending exclusive distribution rights for ITV-1 thru IMMB BG unless there was a breach of contract or some other exit clause available so Harry/ENZC could take the rights back without Savov's permission.

It's my understanding that IMMB or IMMB BG would have had some kind of exclusive and worldwide distribution agreement in place to be able to get ITV-1 to market in Europe or the US after clinical trials. So, not simply a non-exclusive contract regionally bound to, say, the country of Bulgaria.

Replace Savov's claim about the "patent" with one about "exclusive distribution rights" and it makes more sense.

Immunotech Laboratories Inc. (IMMB) owns 49% of Immunotech Laboratories BG and I, Dimitar Savov, own the other 51%! Immunotech Laboratories BG owns the patent for the medicinal product ITV-1 - ImmunH and has successfully conducted a clinical trial on 31 patients in "Professor Ivan Kirov" Hospital, Sofia, Bulgaria, European Union.

Interestingly, ENZC claims in the lawsuit that Savov breached his promises regarding:

i. Transferring to Enzyolytics of 49% ownership interest in IMMB BG, a subsidiary of IMMB;
ii. Transferring all rights belonging to IMMB under a certain Sublicense agreement;
iii. Permitting and facilitating funding from IMMB BG to Enzolytics to pay for 1) vials for use in clinical trials 2) a validation order required by the Bulgarian Drug Agency.

So which of those items did Savov fail to deliver and what, if anything, is implied about rights to the sublicense agreement if he did not transfer those rights?


Under the IMMB and IMMB BG subsidiary setup, I think the parent company IMMB could sell or go bankrupt and perhaps revoke the exclusive licensing contract de facto, and Savov would be left with no patent (he had no valid claim to the patent?) and no distribution rights (he may actually have a valid claim, unless that contract ended in a legally acceptable way through means NOT requiring his signature. ie do the distribution rights outlive IMMB if IMMB sells or goes defunct?)




Did Harry terminate older agreements legally & properly when moving IP rights to ENZC? Savov has publicly alleged that Harry was running a bookkeeping scam and intentionally avoiding an audit.

For more than 5 years, the CEO of IMMB, Harry Zhabilov, has not organized the mandatory yearly shareholders meetings, has not made yearly balances of the company and has not conducted an audit of the company on purpose.

Additionally, if the following claim is true, Savov potentially has a lot more skin in the game than petty revenge:

Immunotech Laboratories BG has signed long-term agreements with many big partners for the sale of millions of sets of ITV-1 for countries like Ukraine, Greece, Romania, Turkey, and others.

But of course Savov has alleged a lot, and nothing so far through formal legal channels.




Afaik Savov built a whole factory to produce ITV-1 and started this project before Harry transferred the rights to ENZC. Losing access to ITV-1 could have potentially screwed Savov over financially and he'd be understandably bitter, and maybe desperate to get some of his dollars back by any means available. Savov doesn't seem like a 'good guy' here at all, but he may also have been scammed to some extent. Or at least not understood the fine print of the agreements he was getting into.


More links and DD:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=165783078

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=165781797