His actions show he's trying to get filings current. That's the only official thing I've seen.
I'm still waiting to hear what about the case doesn't have merit. I'm not trying to argue, I really want to hear why you think it's a no-go. I get that we're not going to go after a company that's shut down, but it seems like there's a clear link between the old and new company, and I see no reason why we couldn't go after them just as we went after the first one. If this guy defrauded us and sold us a trademark and patent that he didn't really own, then we can go after him personally.
Do you think the other side was in the right? Do they have a case that I am missing? Is the other company completely immune from anything we'd try to do? Did our shares not hold on to a certain value and so the deal was off?
I'd love to see the initial contract and figure out what I'm missing here.