"I very much doubt the receiver will be interested in fighting any legitimate judgment or lawsuit after review..."
I have no argument with your statement. Only I ask, has the judge granted the motion to appoint a receiver?
"and we have no idea...what the company has been hiding from everyone as far as lawsuits and other liabilities."
FYI, the company can't hide anything, since it is not a living being, with a mind or any ability to think or act. In other words, while M&M may be guilty of all sorts of criminal endeavors, including selling illegal, unregistered shares of SPNG and then hiding the proceeds of their illgotten gains; the company itself, would be incapable of planning or carrying out such activity.
And that's where I think the Feds may have erred in naming SPNG one of the defendents in this particular case. Since it's been demonstrated that SPNG has a legitimate business, or at least $7.7 million worth, I don't believe it should have been named as such in the complaint.