NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[hoffmann6383]

What the "experts" fail to mention is that court disagreed with the big ticket item of a permanent price impairment due to spoofing. Only the sales by NWBO based on prices closely tied to the alleged spoofs matter.

Thanks for sharing your opinion Ex. I disagree.

I find it interesting that your opinions are always disguised as fact. Dubious facts that consistently paint NWBO in the worst light possible. In ethics 101 it is drilled into attorneys heads that you can't guarantee any result as litigation is uncertain. Yet, every single one of your legal opinions are disguised as fact. These sort of comments are the kind of things (ethical) lawyers try to avoid.

Now I'll address your opinion, which I believe to be a wild misrepresentation of what typically occurs in court. You stated that the Report & Recommendation somehow limited NWBO's potential damages to stock sales in the case of 30 transactions. The limiting of damages doesn't happen at this stage. The only thing the judge is addressing is whether the case is sufficiently plead to survive a motion to dismiss. I believe the spoofing damages, and any potential long term impact, will be debated by experts at trial and in depositions.

In fact, the Court made it clear in their report & recommendation that they didn't consider the permanent price impact of spoofing. The Court discounted the statements of Professor Milgrom as "Plaintiff did not attach the Milgrom report to the FAC, and it is not available on the docket for the Alaska Electrical Pension Fund case, the Court is unable to review it for itself". NWBO solely relied upon Professor Milgrom for the proposition that Defendants’ manipulative acts would have had a “permanent price impact” and the Court did not take his statements under consideration. I expect NWBO to clear this up in the second amended complaint. I also expect the long term effect of spoofing to be an issue decided by the jury after hearing from experts on both sides of the issue. This is not a proper issue to decide at the MTD stage as you state.

No outcome in litigation is certain. Your twisting of the narrative is unethical and likely incorrect. I believe the long term price effect of spoofing will be decided upon by a jury of our peers.


Have a good one Ex. by.