InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
AI Subscribe Login/Register account icon
S&P 500
5,815.03
(
0.61%
)
US TECH 100
19,734.40
(
0.00%
)
Dow Jones
42,863.86
(
0.97%
)
Brent Oil
77.52
(
0.06%
)
Bitcoin
64,569.49
(
2.74%
)
Post# of 346920
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

loanranger

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 211
Posts 32356
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 06/30/2009

loanranger

Member Level

Re: scion post# 322672

Monday, 06/14/2010 4:00:00 PM

Monday, June 14, 2010 4:00:00 PM

Post# of 346920
scion,
Based on 1)the second Motion to Extend, 2)the letter requesting clarification of the courts response to it, referencing "these Defendants'" and 3)the courts grant of the second extension without qualification, wouldn't it appear that that request was made solely on the behalf of Spongetech and Metter and that the other defendants response was due on 6/11?

Wouldn't you expect them to have been Pacerized by now if they were filed on time?

TIA

I'm tryin ta think but nuttin happens......Curly, the deepest of the Stooges.

Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.

Sign Up