I agree that this case info does not prove that Nixon will return to trading.
This case doesn't even prove that Nixon's company will get any money back, let alone use it to open new restaurants instead of using it to relist which in turn, will hopefully put money into shareholders' pockets. [But possibly Nixon could use it for both.]
This case only proves something I was wondering about, whether any toxic lenders who victimized Nixon's company have been prosecuted by the SEC since WCVC got revoked, and the answer is yes; and this case shows some benefit to WCVC, that the toxic lender was forced to surrender its conversion rights. Clearing a debt of this sort would certainly look good on return-to-trading filings.
At least one item for future research is whether a/the Court has said whether and how the fund (that is holding the judgement $$$) is to be distributed, or whether it is all simply "paid to the government" (wording in the case), as in surrendered to it. I have to rely on Google for those searches (maybe Bing as well), so odds of finding anything are more miss than hit.