InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 5
Posts 2099
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/04/2007

Re: Castor_Durdent post# 51187

Wednesday, 12/07/2011 12:57:31 PM

Wednesday, December 07, 2011 12:57:31 PM

Post# of 60938
It looks like the request was for a hearing on four separate actions. 1. a preliminary injunction; or 2. a show cause and temporary restraining order; or 3. an order shortening the time or a hearing on a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order; or 4. for appointment of a provisional director.

If I had to guess, it was a motion to stop the vote or, in the alternative, appoint a provisional director.

It is an odd motion because Williams complaint in regards to the exparte motion filed by management was that the court really does not have jurisdiction. He could not have seriously believed that a California court was going to stop the vote. California would probably tell him the proper court is in Delaware (and maybe Texas on the outside). I would think he knows this so I am not sure what he was really trying to do. If he was serious he would have filed in Delaware.

Without reading everything it is hard to gauge what this was really all about. I get the feeling it was a necessary evil to foreclose the company from trying to backtrack to California after the vote but I really am just guessing. And if the play was a tactical move I won't even be able to tell what the game plan is until the next set of filings.


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.