Newman, you must be correct in your deduction. When the Judge granted the defendants' "Motion to Dismiss" (MTD) and threw out NWBO's case against them, it was not because NWBO's lawyers had failed to present a case that the Defendants had been guilty of illegal activities (in the form of naked shorting). It was because the illegal activities had not been adequately shown to be a cause of the long term depression in NWBO's market value.
However, at the same time as allowing the Defendants' MTD the Judge also gave NWBO's lawyers permission to provide documentation to strengthen their case, specifically, he advised, on the linkage between the Defendants' illegal activities and the long term depression in NWBO's market value. This is a second bite of the cherry for the Plaintiffs, gratis the Presiding Judge. He wouldn't have done that unless he considered that the rest of the evidence was pretty robust.
So, not so worrying a turn of events than as at first glance.