Market Makers are responsible for their own trades and that of their customers. You can disagree all you want with federal court judges on an anonymous message board account but it's not going to change the thinking and rulings of federal court judges one iota.
have a good one LC!
Defense Counsel starts to talk about market makers trading for themselves and/or on behalf of clients and Judge Stein interrupts and ask if this is the same situation as Harrington II. Defense Counsel agrees. Judge Stein cuts him off and ask “Are you suggesting I should disagree with Judge Schofield on that issue?” Defense Counsel says no, but he can distinguish Harrington II. Judge Stein asks, on the particular issue of whether trading was done on behalf of clients, can you differentiate. Defense Counsel alleges Harrington identified the clients and NWBO did not. Judge Stein asked where in Harrington did the plaintiffs identify the specific clients.
Judge Stein questions whether at this stage of the litigation NWBO needs to differentiate whether the trading was on behalf of defendants, their clients or both.
Plaintiff Counsel: "Not only have courts held, including in Harrington, twice, that the fact that you are trading on behalf of a client somehow exculpates you from liability is simply incorrect.”
^^
📢Oral Argument Update📢$NWBO v. @citsecurities, et al, Case No 1:22-cv-10185-GHW-GWG
The Spoofing Lawsuit
NWBO’s lawsuit alleges 2,849 episodes of spoofing $NWBO's stock over a five year period by market makers Canaccord Genuity LLC, Citadel Securities LLC, G1 Execution…