Boston's research

[boston745]

So let me touch on one incident that made me think my LDS attorney was compromised.
What occurred was I stumbled onto the fact that while Im the beneficiary of the warrants, I am not the technical holder. The actual "holder" of my warrants are Cede & Co. If I am not the "holder" does the particular clause from the warrants apply to me? My main case against Sintx for breach stems from a lack of notification to holder, namely me. If im not the holder does Sintx have to contact me or just Cede & Co? When i brought this up to my attorney he actually responded quite quickly, faster than he usually responds, and used this information to discourage me further trying to steer me toward withdrawing my pursuits.
However, I contacted my broker to get clarification on beneficiary vs holder. What I found out was that despite me not being the physical holder, that Sintx in fact is supposed to contact me on EACH AND EVERY ADJUSTMENT made to my warrants or provide a central location where this information could be found. Not only did Sintx not contact me/provide that central location on any of the adjustments, based on the information provided by my broker, Sintx potentially failed to contact Cede & Co on some of the adjustments that can be found in SEC filings. I say Sintx may have failed here, because as I understand it, this information is supposed to be passed down from Cede & Co to the beneficiaries of the warrants; first through agents and then to brokers. Well my broker is missing the final exercise price before one class of my warrants expired as well as was missing the exercise price before the 200:1 RS back in 2024. Thus if I had wanted to, I could not have exercised my warrants before said RS when the warrants were in the money for the first time since they were issued. The last exercise price of record that my broker had was barely in the money, and only for a brief time, before that reverse split. The price they had on file was .25 when the price should have been .021.
Instead of seeing that Sintx was in breach of its contract with me and possibly warrant agents, my attorney focused on that it would cost more to pursue this is greater than i would get back. This despite the clause in the warrants that stipulate that Sintx is responsible for all legal fees if its in breach. Upon bringing that up he said that the clause didnt say what I thought but failed to clarify what it was I had misinterpreted. He did the same thing in regards to me bringing up the size of my cost basis of my warrants insisting that my paper loss was not as large as the amount my broker indicated. I showed him my year end statement but our relationship came to an end before I could show him proof of said loss on my 1099 from my broker.
By not sending Sintx a demand letter I cannot attempt to recover fees I paid him until I find a new attorney actually willing to send said letter. Now, does this sound like an attorney working in my interests or someone elses?

Again, all he had to do was send Sintx a demand letter to begin negotiations. If this matter was going to go to court because Sintx ignored or we were unable to come to terms, I would have to pursue it in New York City as warrants specify that location as being jurisdiction. My case is clear, Sintx is in breach on its contract with me and other parties. Why my attorney did not want to pursue is suspect.

Here is the specific clause that spells out that Sintx agrees to bear the costs of me trying to seek remedy for its breach; any material damage. It willfully and knowingly failed to notify me and others.

if the Company willfully and knowingly fails to comply with any provision of this Warrant, which results in any material damages to the Holder, the Company shall pay to the Holder such amounts as shall be sufficient to cover any costs and expenses including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees, including those of appellate proceedings, incurred by the Holder in collecting any amounts due pursuant hereto or in otherwise enforcing any of its rights, powers or remedies hereunder.

Now I asked my attorney if he had any conflicts concerning Sintx or specifically Sintx mgmt/board (i do not recall exactly); he said he did not. However as Sintx does have LDS connections (Kipke/Medtech and ?) and my attorney was also a member of said church, he clearly had a conflict which he did not disclose. Furthermore I believe someone contacted him which is why I questioned whether the Church or someone connected to it, did so? Although you have to wonder how they knew who my attorney was since he never made contact with Sintx... I already established in another post, that they are illegally listening in and/or harassing me where I live. Refer to this post that provides evidence of this:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=176658331

Warrant contract:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1269026/000149315222026563/ex4-11.htm