Work into your logic and explanation the $5.4M that Xeriant did pay to XTI. You left that key part out.
And, work into your logic and your explanation the $5.4M XTI equity debt obligation that XTI claimed it owed to Xeriant, that upon the Inpixion XTI merger and stock conversion XTIA satisfied its debt obligation to Xeriant with issuance of XTI and XTIA shares to Xeriant.
As for the court case, it’s very clear you’re not an attorney nor have the disposition for one. How do we KNOW the initially missed $1M down payment will not be brought out as an issue when all of the discovery is presented to the court, is because 1.) XTIA would have already brought it out, then wanting discovery to support their claim. Didn’t occur. Nor will it. And 2.) discovery is not presented to the court. Discovery is presented to the other side.
Quester, you just cannot give up on your fabricated pre-concluded story and your terribly faulty reasoning. Dad gum it, you’re going to make your pre-conclusion work out somehow, right? Best way is just like in religion, have your pre-conclusion then make up the story to fit it, pesky facts ignore them, treat them as irrelevant. Trrump style.
All this over the head of JohnnyDope who years for the simplicity of Canada, and in following an idiot Grifter who thinks he’s hitler-in-the-making.
.
Market Data 
Markets 
