It’s settled and over with. with PREJUDICE. But of course you won’t SETTLE for that. You’ll keep going on and on the way you go on about all the other settled matters that are behind us
A LOT of ill intentioned people orbiting around this stock.
It would appear that the plaintiffs stole equipment and other valuable assets from the company before they left. So why would Rik pay the settlement if it’s unfair?
Obviously the judge agreed with him and granted him the offset. Thus the dismissal with prejudice and a new settlement that is more fair to the company.
Yes, the judge did retain the right to enforce the agreement but I’ll bet it’s more to protect nphc than anything else.. no more attempts to harm nphc.. And their is a confidentiality clause so I doubt we will know all the terms of the agreement.. ..
Market Data 
Markets 
