I think Auctus has the upper hand after reading their counter suit. If what they claim is true, it's another fine example of how the CEO (and the cfo at this point) got out classed and proven to be in over their heads.
It'll likely come down to how the judge (jury in this case) interprets the agreement. I think a judge would read it a little more black and white than a jury will. I think pct lawyers think this too and that's why they asked for a jury trial. I think Auctus likely has better representation as well. If I had to bet, I'd bet in Auctus' favor here.
Two very simple and obvious reasons right off the top of my head
1. To pressure Auctus to settle on a lesser amount of warrants and a bleed out of shares
2. To delay as long as possible the sale of over 100,000,000 shares into the PCTL market which would plummet the share price deep into the trips and make financing impossible
PCT has already showed their hand with delaying the sale of the warrant shares by leaving the authorized shares insufficient. Straight up delay tactic which had nothing to do with the law suit as it was the case well before the settlement agreement was reached
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
