Yes, that is by definition a hijacked shell.
"there is a LEGAL PROCESS through the US LEGAL SYSTEM/COURTS OF LAW called a “Custodianship”"
Yes, that is what the SEC calls a hijacked shell - and Sharp has been reduced to hijacking shells and his record is dismal.
Some of the most notable pump and dump schemes of the last five years were possible because of corporate hijackings. The failure to properly investigate corporate hijackings in the penny stock markets is arguably the SEC’s greatest enforcement failure of the last decade.
File a state custodianship or receivership action where the entity is formed using pleadings that falsely state among other things, that the custodian or receiver has not regulatory background or disciplinary history and will reinstate the operations of the issuer or take actions for the benefit of the existing shareholders.
Issue shares to the hijackers, receiver or custodian and nominees, which substantially dilute the then shareholders. (This is exactly what Sharp did - he issued himself Preferred shares so he controls the vote not the shareholders).
Sharp was denied custodianship on two shells he attempted to hijack but the management of the companies fought it and won - Sharp was busted for lying about informing the management of his attempt to gain custodianship.
IG
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
