MeiMei

[Next Bridge Hydrocarbons @nbhydrocarbons]

Next Bridge Hydrocarbons Announces Special Dividend of Common Stock

https://t.co/wUmSuD0kAe

[JoRL @spaceghostRL]

@SamsUxyyeah @Nashaway @nbhydrocarbons NBH confirms in PR:
You can hold your dividend shares at broker or transfer agent.

[MARDÜK the SMASH Panda💛 @MetaGuyMarduk]

$MMTLP

NEXT BRIDGE HYDROCARBONS
500 W. Texas Avenue, Suite 890
Midland, Texas 79701
432-684-0018

June 15, 2026

Dear Valued Shareholder,

Thank you for your inquiry regarding shares available through our recently effective S-1 offering. I sincerely appreciate your interest and your continued support of Next Bridge Hydrocarbons.

I want to personally apologize for the delays in this process. As many of you know, we have spent the past three and a half years navigating a complex and often challenging regulatory landscape. While reaching this milestone is an important achievement, there is still significant work ahead of us.

I respectfully ask for your patience as we continue working through the remaining steps. Our team is actively engaged on multiple fronts, and I believe we are approaching several important developments that I look forward to sharing with shareholders in the near future.

Your steadfast support, encouragement, and confidence in the company have helped carry us through an extraordinary journey. We do not take that support for granted, and we remain committed to acting in the best interests of all shareholders.

Thank you again for your patience and trust. I look forward to updating you soon.

Sincerely,

Greg McCabe
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
Next Bridge Hydrocarbons

[KKep @kimkep4796]

🔥 MMAT Update – June 11, 2026

📄 Docket Nos. 2863, 2864, 2865 & 2866

What happened?

Trustee Christina Lovato filed a series of motions asking Judge Spraker to schedule an expedited status conference regarding DTCC’s subpoena compliance and production delays.

⸻
🎯 The Main Issue

The Trustee says DTCC still has not fully produced certain subpoenaed records, particularly transaction-level Correspondent Clearing Data that has been requested since 2025.

According to Trustee counsel David Burnett:

“That data is very important to our analysis.”

In simple terms, this appears to be data that could help identify who was actually involved in specific trades, not just trading totals.

⸻
⏰ Why The Rush?

This is the biggest takeaway.

The Trustee specifically warned the Court that continued delays could impact potential claims because of statute-of-limitations deadlines.

Burnett also stated:

“Statute of limitations deadlines make DTCC’s immediate production … very time-sensitive.”

🚨 That’s strong language coming directly from Trustee counsel.

⸻
📬 What’s Next?

At this point:

✅ DTCC has not filed a Motion to Quash

✅ Trustee has not filed a Motion to Compel

✅ Trustee wants Judge Spraker to step in and hold a focused conference to address DTCC’s outstanding production and determine next steps.

⸻
👀 What Stands Out

The repeated focus on:

🔹 Correspondent Clearing Data
🔹 Transaction-level records
🔹 Time-sensitive discovery
🔹 Statute-of-limitations concerns

suggests the Trustee believes this remaining DTCC data is important to the ongoing investigation.

📌 Bottom Line: The investigation appears very much alive, DTCC remains an active discovery target, and the Trustee is pushing for answers sooner rather than later.

⚖️ Not Legal Advice • For Discussion & Entertainment Purposes Only ⚖️

https://t.co/4N7vgqGBS3

https://t.co/XEoa0CuDNr

https://t.co/JK04WzlxRq

[Geo-Gray! @SamsUxyyeah]

I am S-1 Gray.
For 3 and a half years I have been steadfast that the S-1 is Key to Resolution and Monetisation for @nbhydrocarbons Shareholders.
I Thank You.
🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗

[Next Bridge Hydrocarbons @nbhydrocarbons]

Next Bridge Hydrocarbons Announces SEC Declares Effective its S-1 Registration Statement

Company prices and commences a public offering of 40 million shares

https://t.co/2hO7KuPeJJ

[Brad Garlinghouse @bgarlinghouse]

The “Anti-Crypto Army” was defeated…
by the courts…
by the voters.
And by Trump.

It never made policy, legal or political sense.

Combatting financial innovation only helped protect those that wanted to keep an old, often broken, system in place.

[Swati Gupta @hrswatigupta]

The airline lost my bag for 72 hours.

They handed me a $50 “courtesy” voucher at the baggage desk and smiled like they’d done me a favor.

I kept the voucher. Then I opened my laptop and used a 1999 international treaty they never mention at check-in.

Total recovered: $1,650.

Here are the three legal weapons most passengers never know they have.

[GoOrogrande_4th @Maximus711474]

@palikaras @Nasdaq MMAT BK, Order on Nasdaq Motion to Quash,
Doc 2806, p 1-4:

[George Palikaras @palikaras]

I know that @Maximus711474 actually reads documents.

For those who do not, their dangerous and misleading commentary about the order is another signal of their ignorance and/or desperation to protect their patrons, while running their influencer/faked-shareholders-for-hire little business they are running for professional ambulance chasers.

For the record:

1. The Court did NOT say MMTLP is “irrelevant”. In fact, the order references MMTLP multiple times.

2. The Court DID authorize BROAD production of #MMAT/TRCH trading data, including:
-all orders
-executions
-cancellations
-replaces
-order attributes
-RASH/CORE data
across nearly FOUR YEARS which is extraordinary…

Did you know?
NASDAQ did NOT trade #MMTLP (which traded on the OTC), hence they do NOT have ANY MMTLP data to produce… you weird geniuses you! 🤣

3. The Court explicitly REJECTED Nasdaq’s “undue burden” argument and reaffirmed the Trustee’s broad Rule 2004 investigatory powers regarding potential wrongdoing.😎

4. Saying “everything else was quashed” is simply false. Nasdaq LOST the motion to quash in all MATERIAL respects related to the CORE trading data they control! 🦋

And finally, the Trustee is an independent fiduciary appointed by the Court. If the investigation had no merit, the subpoenas would NOT keep surviving judicial scrutiny.

🧐 speculation and opinions have exactly ZERO evidentiary value in court.

Actual court orders do.

[George Palikaras @palikaras]

🚨Breaking news: 🦋

@Nasdaq just LOST its Motion to Quash.

Read that again s l o w l y . . .

The Bankruptcy Court in Nevada has now ordered Nasdaq to produce extensive $MMAT/TRCH trading data under Rule 2004, including RASH and CORE data, order attributes, cancellations, replaces, executions, and related transaction records covering nearly FOUR YEARS.

The Court was NOT persuaded by the ‘undue burden’ argument, noting that producing ~15GB of spreadsheet data is not exactly impossible for… Nasdaq. (One $10 usb stick)

Even more important, the Court explicitly recognized the Trustee’s AUTHORITY to investigate whether wrongdoing occurred on behalf of the estate, including potential claims tied to stock trading activity.

Translation:
This investigation is very much ALIVE.

For months, some people mocked and undermined the Trustee’s efforts, claimed discovery would never happen, and acted like every subpoena didn’t get served initially and that it would be crushed before daylight. Instead, the wall keeps cracking.

FINRA discovery.
Now Nasdaq discovery.
And the Court explicitly referenced separate pending motions involving Citadel, Virtu, and Anson.

Interesting times ahead.

Turns out Rule 2004 is not just a decorative suggestion.

To the Trustee and legal teams, incredible respect.

It takes courage to walk into rooms filled with institutions that have virtually unlimited resources and say:

‘Produce the data’

And to the echo chambers already warming up their spin machines tonight…

You may want to read the actual order first. 🤝

Blessings to all.

[Brad Garlinghouse @bgarlinghouse]

Over a decade in the making, under a minute to explain. $XRP

[elf @ElfCarbon]

DD 911: $MMTLP
(I know I started something else today, but this is actually pretty important and time sensitive)

Can EU holders can ask their brokers for FIGI numbers on their Next Bridge shares... and if its changed recently, or has a change scheduled?

Even ask about ISIN, SEDOL, WKN identifiers.

This is a critical thing to monitor because EU has more transparency for investors, and the synthetics are tied there.

And US holders: you can call and ask for ISIN, CUSIP, and if you can get FIGI - its gold. Having to disclose the FIGI number on a EU synthetic in an American holder's account is a noose.

This is when they will make mistakes. This is when research nerds need to be watching.

[Mario Nawfal @MarioNawfal]

🇺🇸🇪🇺 The food you eat every day is banned in Europe. Not some of it. Most of it.

American strawberries are sprayed with pesticides linked to hormone disruption and cancer that are banned across Europe. Drop one in salt water and see what comes out.

American white bread contains potassium bromate, a cancer-linked chemical banned in the EU, Canada, China, and India. The FDA hasn't reviewed it since 1973.

Same products. Different standards. And Americans eat this every single day.

Watch the video.

Source: @CoryBOnChain

[Kenny Nguyen @mrnguyen007]

HELLO CLARITY ACT.. 🇺🇸

THANK YOU SENATE BANKING COMMITTEE.. 👏 🙏

@SenatorTimScott @SenThomTillis @SenLummis @Sen_Alsobrooks @SenateGOP 🇺🇸

American Crypto Investors! 🇺🇸

[Kenny Nguyen @mrnguyen007]

🚨 🚨 BREAKING NEWS:

BOOOOOOM! 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥

CLARITY ACT MARKUP VOTE IS NEXT THURSDAY, MAY 14, 2026. 📃 🇺🇸 🗓

[KKep @kimkep4796]

🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️

🦋 $MMAT | In re Meta Materials Inc. (Bankr. D. Nev.)
📅 Filed: May 8, 2026 🌶️
📄 Document 2769 — Stipulated Protective Order Relating to Subpoenas to FINRA

🧠 Layman’s Breakdown

This filing is actually good news for the trustee’s investigation.

In simple terms:

🚨 What just happened?

The trustee and FINRA reached an agreement on the rules for turning over sensitive information.

Translation:

FINRA is preparing to produce documents/data, but wanted strict confidentiality protections first.

This is NOT a fight over whether information can be produced.

This is more of a:

🤝 “Fine, we’ll produce it—but here are the rules.”

That’s a meaningful shift.

⸻
🎯 Why does this matter?

FINRA previously fought hard, arguing:
⚖️ burden
🔒 privilege
📁 confidentiality
🕵️ investigative protections

Now we have a signed protective order.

That usually means:

✅ Production is moving forward
✅ Logistics are being finalized
✅ The trustee is getting closer to actual evidence

⸻
📜 What is a protective order?

Think of it like a court-enforced NDA.

Sensitive material can be handed over, but:

❌ not dumped publicly
❌ not posted online
❌ not used outside this case
✅ only approved people can see it
⸻
📊 What can FINRA label confidential?

A LOT.

Examples:

📂 internal regulatory materials
🕵️ investigation-related information
📈 trading / transactional data
🏢 proprietary business info
👤 customer/member information
💰 investor/fund positions
📨 nonpublic communications

Translation:

The trustee may be getting highly sensitive market data.

⸻
🔐 Two levels of secrecy

🟡 1. CONFIDENTIAL

Can be seen by:
👩‍⚖️ trustee
⚖️ trustee’s attorneys
👥 staff helping the case
📊 retained experts
🛠 litigation consultants

⸻
🔴 2. ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY

Even tighter.

Basically limited to:

⚖️ lawyers
🧠 approved experts
🖥 support personnel

Meaning:

🚫 not broad distribution

⸻
👀 HUGE practical point: Who’s on the trustee team?

This filing specifically identifies outside counsel helping the trustee:

⚖️ Hartman & Hartman
⚖️ Christian Attar
🔥 Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP
⚖️ Robison Sharp Sullivan & Brust / SBW
⚖️ Schneider Wallace

Why this matters:

Kasowitz is not your average routine bankruptcy admin firm.

That suggests:

💥 serious litigation preparation
⸻
🛡 What FINRA still protects

Important caveat:

FINRA is NOT waiving privilege.

They specifically preserve:

🔒 attorney-client privilege
📚 work product
🕵️ investigative file privilege
⚖️ other legal protections

Translation:

This is NOT “open the vault.”

⸻
🌐 Can shareholders see this data?

Not automatically.

If filed with court:

🔐 likely under seal
⚖️ public release would require further steps

So:

👀 shareholders probably won’t immediately see raw production.
⸻
🚀 Big strategic takeaway

This strongly suggests discovery is shifting from:

❌ “Should FINRA produce?”

to

✅ “How do we handle what FINRA produces?”

That’s a meaningful procedural win.

The real question now:

🤔 What’s in the data?

⸻
🦋 Quick Summary

FINRA and the trustee just agreed on confidentiality rules for subpoenaed materials. That usually means production is moving forward. Sensitive market/regulatory data may be coming in, heavyweight litigation counsel is clearly involved, but much of the evidence may remain sealed unless used later in litigation.

⚠️ Not legal advice

https://t.co/lRm1xi9kUw

[Geo-Gray! @SamsUxyyeah]

#MMTLP
FIRST TO GET OUT AT $15 GETS OUT CHEAPEST!
🤗🤗🤗🤗

[KKep @kimkep4796]

@TheTrndisuFrnd Reading!!!

[John Brda @johnbrda]

https://t.co/4Ow0Uzz5sT

It looks like it is effective.

Let’s see what happens.