Kaizenman your question about what approach CEO Powers might take in a possible settlement is one of psychology not law and therefore out of my area of expertise. Additionally those questions are always dependent on how the litigation is proceeding and, of course, “How much money?”
In general tho, as I said, I believe the company’s primary purpose is to preempt future short attacks and concomitant “journalist” negative opinioning so the market or our partner(s), if any, are allowed a relatively level field. As far as the case being a template for other similar claims, I think the lawfirm probably had options, and if so I would expect selected the trading history with the strongest set of favorable facts and secondarily, relatively significant blackboard-able damages.
If this is an adversary fire suppression tactic, presumably actual positive events the company wishes to protect from those attacks should be in the way. Have a pleasant evening.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
