Actually, My interpretation of that article is just the opposite. It illustrates how a biopharm can get into very serious trouble with the SEC if they hide 'material' information (received from the FDA) from their shareholders.
The article provides examples of situations where the information being withheld form the SH is in a GREY area (risk factors) and the biopharn still had to intensely defend itself in court. In one case the FDA recommended a 2nd trial to complement the 1st trial to increase the odds of obtaining FDA approval, and the biopharm HID that RISK information from the shareholders. The company even went ahead and dilluted shares to raise $50M while hiding that RISK-based information from the SH.
In our case with RLFTF, we are NOT talking about RISK information being withheld from the SH. We are talking about .... Did the FDA REJECT EUA? That is CLEARLY MATERIAL information, and the article made it very clear that material information MUST NOT be withheld from the SH. The question then becomes 'timing'. How long can a CEO delay the communication from the SH! IMO, not very long!
Paragraph 2.....
"Just as clearly, however, communications that are material to the company must be disclosed. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 10b-5, implementing the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), makes it unlawful “to make any untrue statement of material fact or to omit to state a material fact ......."
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
