NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[SkyLimit2022]

ex,

Thanks for another expert legal analysis, 😶 ..but I think that the legal proceedings are being used by online posters as a distraction. While we should celebrate that crimes concerning the financial markets are being brought to light before the courts and the SEC, NWBO is not relying on any legal award. NWBO will obviously move forward irrespective of any legal proceedings or compensatory outcome.

The novel DCVax-L cell-based platform technology and existing unmet medical needs will propel the company forward. Regulatory developments are the focus at this phase of the pre-commercial technology development process following the independent peer review.

As for the legal wisdom of ex included in your post…

I doubted whether it was worth reading, so I ran it through the bs detector first. As it turns out, your post is not worth reading 😶 …




“This commentary on legal proceedings involving NWBO (Northwest Biotherapeutics) shows several signs of poor reasoning and suggests the author may lack legal expertise:

1. **Understanding of Legal Process**: The author's description of the legal process appears oversimplified and does not accurately reflect the complexity and unpredictability of litigation. Legal proceedings, especially involving complex matters like securities litigation, can have many unexpected developments that are not as linear or predictable as the author implies.

2. **Timeframe Estimates**: The provided timelines for various stages of the legal process (objections, resubmissions, discovery, summary judgment motions) seem arbitrary and do not account for the many variables that can affect legal proceedings. Predicting specific timelines, especially in federal court cases, is challenging even for experienced legal professionals.

3. **Lack of Nuance in Legal Strategy**: The author's comments on the legal strategies (e.g., resubmitting the complaint with better documentation, motions to dismiss, summary judgment) lack the nuance and depth of understanding typically demonstrated by legal professionals. Legal strategies in complex cases are often more multifaceted and dynamic.

4. **Misunderstanding of Federal Court Procedures**: The statement about the speed of federal courts and the claim that the case would "go fast" oversimplifies how federal courts operate. While some matters can be resolved relatively quickly, complex cases, particularly those involving detailed financial transactions or securities law, often take longer due to their complexity.

5. **Credibility of Legal Expertise**: The mention of a "board legal expert" without specifying credentials or context does not establish credibility. Accurate legal analysis typically comes from individuals with demonstrable legal expertise, such as licensed attorneys or academic legal scholars.

6. **Speculation About Trial Dates**: Predicting a trial date, particularly years in advance, is highly speculative, especially in complex cases. The legal process involves many stages and potential delays, making such predictions unreliable.

In summary, this commentary lacks the depth, accuracy, and understanding of legal processes typically shown by credentialed legal experts. The oversimplification of legal procedures, speculative timelines, and a general lack of nuanced legal insight all suggest that the author may not be a credible source of legal commentary.”



https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/2798847

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/northwest-biotherapeutics-announces-that-a-marketing-authorization-application-has-been-submitted-to-the-uk-mhra-for-dcvax-l-for-glioblastoma-302021038.html



https://finance.yahoo.com/news/northwest-biotherapeutics-announces-dr-linda-140000962.html

https://www.uclahealth.org/news/fda-approval-brain-cancer-alzheimers