Something to keep in mind about the CSM complaint.
CP, I think you need to take a deep breath and realize just how hypocritical you're being in drawing every conclusion you have been from PEREGRINE's amended complaint when for the last 18 months you've been discrediting the same document from the plaintiff in the Class Action.
In summary, just because a plaintiff says the word fraud and secret motives, doesn't prove anything until a judge rules on it!
If we're using the plaintiff's wording in this complaint as fact simply because PPHM is the plaintiff then we must also assume everything the plaintiff has said in their amended class action complaint is true until a judge rules otherwise. And that is nonsense.
There are many reasons that this lawsuit will never go to trial and/or through discovery IMO. Many. Nobody wants that. Not CSM, Not Peregrine...not whoever was behind the labeling errors.
The lack of detailed PPHM information and timeline on page 7 (in an otherwise very detailed document) about finding the discrepancies while "preparing for and end of phase 2 meeting" is why PPHM doesn't want this to move on IMO.
The multiple infractions and FDA violations and possible incentive for creating them are an obvious reason CSM and/or some other entity working with them doesn't want this to move on IMO.
But please stop using a plaintiff's complaint in one lawsuit as scripture when you've just spent the last year discrediting another one as frivolous. It's just not fair debate.
Granted, the judge has already dismissed the class action complaint twice making it less credible; however, we haven't even read CSM's response to this complaint which probably has much "juicier" PPHM gossip within it IMO. My gut says we never will get the chance.
Lets at least wait for that before going overboard on the sabotage theory again, eh? It's equivalent to someone writing 3 long posts about PPHM committing securities fraud the day after the first class action complaint was filed.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
