ERHC Energy Inc (ERHE)

[Krombacher]

Rebuttal Response to Kingpindg

Section 7: "The temporary restraining order prevented ERHC from monetizing its prime asset, EEZ Block 4, which would have guaranteed ERHC the resources to continue to meet its obligations without exception, including but not limited to timeously filing its periodic filings."

Section 8: "The claimant also obtained a sealing order, restraining any disclosure of the litigation by the parties, which effectively prevented ERHC from making any disclosures regarding the litigation for fear of significant court sanction."

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/apdocuments/3-19419-event-4.pdf

Upon reviewing Sections 7 and 8, I respectfully disagree with Kingpindg's interpretation. Section 7 emphasizes that the restraining order stopped ERHC from monetizing Block 4, which indirectly impacted their ability to file, not that monetizing itself directly blocked the filing. It was the lack of resources resulting from the inability to monetize that affected the filings.

Section 8 explicitly states that the sealing order restrained litigation disclosures, which could include financial information, as financials may be part of the litigation context. Thus, ERHC was not able to disclose anything about the litigation, thereby contributing to its inability to file disclosures.

Lastly, the term "timeously" is problematic. The proper word should be "timely," indicating that the document contains grammatical flaws, adding ambiguity to its intended meaning.

Krombacher