Replies to post #154615 on World Surveillance Group Inc (fka WSGI)

[be_real]

insighter, I hope you're right but,

"It's not what you know, it's what you can prove"
jmho

[coastiretired]

Please clarify Insighter. I've seen nothing in the agreements or complaint that limits La Jolla sales when the market price fell below the stated floor price. Methinks the floor price dealt with the issuance of shares to La Jolla and not in their sale. Any floor price protections in the contracts were negated by the true up provisions to which both parties agreed.

Most of the complaint deals with WSGI claiming La Jolla breached the EIA agreement when it didn't fully fund WSGI each month under the EIA. La Jolla counters that the monies owed to it from past debenture true ups were deducted from future EIA fundings.

Much of the original complaint has already been dismissed. WSGI has been given a second shot at providing some more substance on a few of their claims which is what the pending ruling is about. We also have a different Judge than the one who originally ruled on the dismissal.

"La Jolla's motion to dismiss is GRANTED. WSGI's claims for breach of fiduciary duty, intentional misrepresentation, fraud in the inducement and securities fraud are DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND."
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/3:2013cv03455/268571/36

Original Complaint http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/919742/000114420413041172/v350816_ex10-1.htm

[ColeThornton]

I realize I can research the court documents*, but I was curious what "you" thought.

As per coastie's information, it looks like what you thought may not even be an issue. You should know that issues like illegal shorting have been a common excuse for the failures of this company for over a decade now.

Unfortunately they are repeated so often many begin to believe them.


*I realized how worthless any claims this company made were years ago.