Enzolytics Inc (ENZC)

[Its_TradingG]

This post from docsetc on the Enzolytics (ENZC) i-Hub board is loaded with misrepresentations, speculation presented as fact, and some flat-out misinformation. Let’s break it down piece by piece:

1. “There are many other charges of fraud we’re leveling at CCC and Harry.”

Reality:
• “We’re leveling” means private individuals or investors are making allegations, not formal charges.
• The SEC is the only party that can file official charges of securities fraud, and so far, only Harry Zhabilov (the former Chief Science Officer) has been named in SEC litigation.
• No official charges exist against Charles Cotropia (CCC) or any other executives as of now.

2. “The SEC gave EVERY ENZC investor ever, full standing against the four main principles at the time when they filed for $92 million against Zhabilov.”

Reality:
• This is false.
• The SEC does not “give standing” to shareholders to sue individuals just by filing a civil case.
• Standing is a legal concept that must be determined by a court in a civil case — not implied or “granted” through SEC action.
• The SEC’s lawsuit is a regulatory enforcement action, not a class action suit on behalf of shareholders.

3. “That several folks here think they know any legal stuff… is dumbfounding.”

Irony Alert:
• The poster accuses others of legal ignorance, but then goes on to misrepresent legal concepts like “standing,” “charges,” and “immunity.”

4. “The ENZC stock price will continue to freeze or sink…”

Speculation:
• This is just personal opinion, not a factual statement.
• While ENZC stock is under pressure due to the SEC action and general concerns around transparency and operations, no one can predict stock movement with certainty.

5. “Charles’ statements… 5-labs… SPAC… we have a direct statement from Zhabilov himself.”

Red Flags:
• If they have a “direct statement from Zhabilov,” where is it? If it’s not part of the SEC filing or public record, it’s hearsay.
• Mentioning “SPAC deal” and “5-labs” without providing documentation makes it impossible to verify.
• Saying “he had to sign it or not” implies insider knowledge of internal board decisions, which the poster likely does not have unless it was leaked (which raises its own legal issues).

6. “You have full standing in any court…”

Again — completely false.
• Courts determine standing, and you must show injury, causation, and redressability in any shareholder suit.
• The SEC action does not automatically enable every shareholder to file a winning civil suit.

7. “CCC dropped a dime on Harry and got limited immunity…”

Speculative conspiracy theory:
• The SEC does not publicly disclose if someone received immunity unless it’s part of a cooperation agreement in a case — which hasn’t been filed publicly regarding CCC.
• No current filings show that CCC (Charles Cotropia) has been charged or named in any enforcement action.
• Claiming “limited immunity” without documentation is pure speculation.

8. “Each member of our group already has a copy of our firm’s letter of engagement…”

Still means nothing unless a case is filed.
• Anyone can get a lawyer to draft a letter of engagement. It doesn’t mean a case has merit, and it certainly doesn’t make their claims factual.

Conclusion:

This post is a mix of opinion, unsubstantiated rumors, and legal misunderstandings, presented in a way that sounds authoritative to mislead retail investors. No court or regulatory authority has charged anyone beyond Zhabilov. Until actual filings or documents are produced, this is just another FUD-laced rant with conspiracy vibes.