Replies to post #104972 on US Stem Cell Inc (USRM)

[Dragon Lady]

The_BIG_RULING_WILL_TAKE_LONGER = MAGNITUDES_MORE_COMPLEX !

There won't be any ruling "soon" (likely a month at least IMO) regarding the main issue as to "SVF IS A DRUG and FDA regulated" blah blah blah.

This >
Quote:
Because the district court’s order was not a “final decision” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we lack jurisdiction to consider the patients’ appeal.

https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201913381.pdf

The fate of the patients banked stem cells is yet to be decided. The case could end up back at the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals if a "final decision" against the defendant is made at the district court level.

THAT = 100% correct.

The "intervenors's" case "trying" to go to the appellate was no case at all - right from the get go. They blew it to put it mildly - and why the appellate was able to flush their issue so quickly and in a few pages of a written ruling by their most Sr judge on that panel, Ginsburg.

Does any of it "tip" the hand as to how those same judges are "leaning" either for, or against USRM - not sure, no way to know for sure ???

The motion they originally filed as to "our banked stem cells" was NEVER RULED ON BY THE LOWER COURT as it hinged on the very possibility that USRM might appeal - and Ungaro stated exactly that, and correctly so according to the appellate bench. She followed the law to the tee.

Also, those people implored the appellate, "But, but we haven't been able to use our banked cells for a year or more - we want them back" blah blah.

Appellate answered, "Well, your motion in the lower court never sought a cause of action as to what you're asking about? We can't make a ruling as an appellate as to something never even brought up in the lower court? You're welcome to go to the lower court and plead that issue there and maybe see us again some day" blah blah end of story.

There is a GROSS MISCONCEPTION as to what an appellate court does and can do. They DO NOT run new trials or make changes because they thought the case should have gone a different way or don't like the ruling, etc.

ALL the appellate can do is VERY narrowly restricted and defined by SCOTUS law - they can only "overturn on errors of a judge in gross misapplication of the law" and that means gross. Minor "mistakes" are almost always non issues before the appellate and they will not overturn a lower court on those kinds of issues.

The only other issue the appellate can/will consider is, "WAS THERE AN ISSUE OF TRIALABLE FACT or FINDING OF LAW" that the lower court missed, skipped over, never gave the defendant their chance to plea and thus rule on, etc.

AND THAT = where the USRM case hinges and where the line of questioning by primarily Marcus was leading - and exactly where the CA case is sitting as we speak awaiting a bench trial as judge Bernal stated, "Summary judgement, NO? I believe there is a disputed and trialable issue of fact and law here, thus it has to be heard and ruled on".

That is it folks - there's two totally separate actions here. The first case ruled on - they need to go back to the district court and re-plead their case and issues in a clear and properly formatted manner, and also wait on the USRM ruling by the appellate as it "might" change their entire case in terms of how they'd file or plead it.

The USRM written brief - will not be "simple and short" but lengthy and very complex IMO and thus will take time. Monday is a holiday - courts are closed. It's going to be March at least IMO.

And - what's even more fascinating to me is that CEO Tomas "gave away" seemingly for free the "USRM stem cell banking business" to Sean Berman, son of Mark Berman MD of the CA case. So who the hell do these people file suit against now, as to "we want our banked stem cells" ????

Whole different issue on that mess.

We wait - and I'd guess a while still, a month at least.

[Stubbornseller]

They should have asked for damages..
Ginsburg touched on it..