The reason the change to Article 6 was incorrect was because it had been added without a proper vote of the shareholders, which is what the filing clearly says [Emphasis Added by me]:
Both are incorrect statements as shareholder action was required by law to adopt an amendment reverse splitting the authorized shares of the company
Oh, and BTW, note that they didn't just write "5", but wrote "five (5) to make sure that it was clear that they meant five. For your theory to be correct, they would have had to have written "one (1)" instead of "five (5)", which would be quite the typo.
AI
