LP, my view is Rosen WILL NEVER admit anything exists in Safe Harbor to start with. Remember, Justin Nelson of SG who tried for the third time to get on the record assets of 32 over 8 billion in liabilities. Judge Walrath threatened to sanction him if he did not stop.
Here is where Rosen has problems in my view. First, how did this claim rise to anything when it was denied 6 months earlier, then why in a LOWER class in terms of priority of payment, then why was not the dilution at least applied equally to all of the equity meaning Preferred Equity Interests and Common Equity Interests alike.
The next question is since Rosen will admit there may be a little left in the actual bk case but not enough to make any difference, then the simple action would be to say well since there is nothing left or very little. then just change the language where by chance if something shows up later, then the Underwriters claim is at least capped.
How can one deny at least the easy part for Rosen would be to just ensure the Underwriters claim is capped. By them not filing an 8K, waiting a year plus to place this Stipulation in the annual 10K, it is more than obvious they were obfuscating the issue. Rosen ran the other 35 Stipulations past the Judge BUT not this one.
To me, knowing how egotistical judges are about their power, I would think she will be very angry. I cannot see this actually making it in front of Judge Walrath when there is no real good excuse for hiding this Stipulation.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
