News Focus
News Focus
icon url

0001 Trader

07/24/21 12:31 PM

#54280 RE: Lucy K #54275

Me and Jeff follow each other on LinkedIn and I will send this to him in a message Lucy! That is excellent!
icon url

Majic

07/25/21 4:35 PM

#54412 RE: Lucy K #54275

Excellent write up, Lucy K. Your opinion is much valued, and thank you for keeping it real.
icon url

123crazyjerry

07/26/21 12:32 AM

#54429 RE: Lucy K #54275

Luck K, you're my favorite legal eagle, that post was badly needed. You got guts, something we need more here.

I feel much better knowing you are here, please keep up the fantastic posting.
icon url

DeltaZIP

07/26/21 2:53 AM

#54432 RE: Lucy K #54275

HCMC lawsuit does claim PM IQOS combusts based on defendants own testing. As such I’m holding and buying any large dip to add to my .0001s after reading this again in the lawsuit document and the judge’s decision to grant motion to dismiss. I read this as better than granting motion without prejudice. The judge was specific that if it combusts it’s game on with the proper request submitted within 14 days as will be allowed.

This is my opinion only and I’m not a lawyer. Always do your own DD.

From the lawsuit filed by HCMC:

“Importantly, nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO), two important combustion markers, were reduced by over 97%.”).) Thus, on information and belief, while Defendants assert that the Accused Infringing Product does not cause combustion of the IQOS® Tobacco Sticks, Defendants’ own testing concludes that 97%, not 100%, of the harmful chemicals associated with combustion are eliminated by the Accused Infringing Product, and the presence of 3% of the two important combustion markers nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide indicates that at least some combustion occurs when the Accused Infringing Product is operated as designed and intended by Defendants.”