Thanks Sojourner. I think if one reads it thoroughly, not just snippets, and the conclusion and appreciates the nature of the legal process involved and how it speaks to their motivations and knowledge that they did not file again, if their current claims were the actual case, it becomes fairly clear cut.
Additionally, it’s interesting to read all the short arguments put forth during the course of the case, including the comparison of the first complaint against the 2nd amended complaint, looking particularly what arguments they deleted and then added in... it’s very illuminating.
Many of the exact same arguments are made in the boards. They were bad then, and still are bad, but they are intended to throw up a fog that is hard for ordinary investors to navigate or to gain confidence on the subject or the company/DCVax.
And of course, that is the purpose. The judge cuts right through it with legal tools, and requirements and also opportunity for the shorts to actually PROVE their point, at an extremely low level for the burden of evidence at that stage.
They never do it. Sure they have references, the equivalent of random links to things said... but it still has to be information and detail that has the possibility of actually proving their larger points and arguments.
They could not and cannot do it. Hence the resort to blogs, hit pieces by key “journalists” and social media attacks, made with still a pretty high degree of “knowing” vagueness... as if they know something that others don’t, or we’re willing to “look at facts” that others ignored.
The truth is, it’s upside down world. In fact, the shorts are not looking at real evidence or facts, they are just creating lots of chaotic noise and fog... distractions that keep people from seeing the facts clearly, and creating doubt and fear.
Good luck to you!
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
