MMTLP #NBH#FOIAdenials#SECfraud
Another day, another step forward in exposing the #MMTLPfiasco manufactured by FINRA and the SEC.
Today I received an Appeal response that included a new batch of documents from a shareholder who chose to remain anonymous. Appreciate your hard work on this FOIA.
The result: 91 additional Congressional & SEC letters tied to MMTLP. All PDFs will be added to the dashboard for full transparency.
The contents of these letters and responses were efforts of shareholders and Members of Congress asking for answers about MMTLP and the U3 halt. Amazing effort!
To everyone pushing for truth and accountability — thank you. Stay locked in.
Focus...
This piece by @kshaughnessy2 is interesting. Some of the key firms allowing unlimited shorts in $MMTLP and I believe $DJT were run by people who have been involved in similar bad shit. Who’s involved ? @TradeUP_APP and their COO @vincentlupo ? Check his ICBC track record below
Vincent Lupo, a 30+ year finance veteran, led top Wall Street brokerage and clearing firms like Industrial Bank of CHINA, before becoming TradeUP's COO in 2021.
🚨NEXT BRIDGE HYDROCARBONS RELEASES PR ANNOUNCING THE EFFECTIVENESS AND AVAILABILITY OF UP TO 40 MILLIONS SHARES OF NBH COMMON SHARES @ $15/SH.
MMTLP MMAT TRCH NBH
@nbhydrocarbons
https://t.co/df52HGhBtS
The S-1 for Next Bridge Hydrocarbons has been held up for over 3 years @SECPaulSAtkins
What company would want to IPO into an abyss of corruption ?
Gutting capital formation one company at a time.
1 ⭐️ ORGANIZATION
S-1 frozen in time just like MMTLP
💥💥May 27, 2026 marked a
LANDMARK PROCEDURAL VICTORY!
🦋⚖️ $MMAT / TRCH / MMTLP
In re Meta Materials Inc. Chapter 7 Bankruptcy — Case No. 24-50792
On March 6, 2025, the Trustee served nine subpoenas seeking trading and market data from:
📌 Charles Schwab
📌 TD Ameritrade
📌 TradeStation
📌 DTCC
📌 Nasdaq
📌 FINRA
📌 Citadel Securities
📌 Virtu Financial
📌 Anson Funds
⚡ All parties are now complying or moving toward EXPEDITED compliance under individualized protective orders governing sensitive trading data and confidential information.
📆 Upcoming calendar of events shown in the graphic below.
📚 This case is becoming a significant example of a Chapter 7 Trustee strategically leveraging the Bankruptcy Code’s powerful discovery and investigatory tools to pursue potential estate claims and maximize value for creditors.
⚠️ Not Legal Advice
Detailed infographic below and song attached.
https://t.co/HE77dAvkwO
$MMAT Even this partial win is a big win for the bankruptcy trustee
FINRA didn’t want to hand these over - but the judge ruled it must
✅ short interest reporting
✅ TRF trading data
✅ Reg SHO short sale data
- @kimkep4796
$MMTLP $TRCH
💥BOOM💥BOOM💥and...BOOM!!!💥
Judge orders DISCOVERY on CITADEL, VIRTU & ANSON FUNDS. Meta Materials's BK Judge Straker rules trustee CAN OBTAIN stipulated TRADING RECORDS, but with PROTECTIVE ORDER LIMITATIONS.
SEE DETAILS BELOW👇👇👇
Epic BITCHSLAPS delivered. Count 'em...one👋...two👋and...three!!!👋
They cannot stop what is coming!!! #Relentless #LockIn
MMAT MMTLP TRCH
FULL DOCUMENTS HERE VIA @kimkep4796 : https://t.co/1xcDC4GHzF
MMAT | In re Meta Materials Inc. | Case No. 24-50792-gs | Doc 2820 | Filed May 27, 2026
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part FINRA’s Motion to Quash Trustee Subpoenas
⚠️ Not Legal Advice
The big picture
This is a major discovery win for the Chapter 7 Trustee.
Judge Spraker basically said:
“FINRA, you do have to turn over important trading/manipulation-related data. But there are limits, and the trustee has to pay certain production costs.”
This order is directly tied to the trustee’s investigation into potential manipulation of Meta stock (MMAT / TRCH / MMTLP).
⸻
What happened in plain English
FINRA tried to block the subpoenas
FINRA asked the court to either:
Kill the subpoenas entirely (motion to quash) OR
Narrow them significantly via protective order.
The judge said:
Not entirely. Some yes. Some no.
Hence:
“Granted in part, denied in part.”
⸻
What the Trustee WON 🥇
1) Short Interest Data — PRODUCE IT
FINRA must turn over reported short interest data.
That includes:
TRCH + MMAT
Sept. 21, 2020 → Aug. 21, 2024
MMTLP
June 28, 2021 → Dec. 14, 2022
Layman’s meaning:
This shows what broker-dealers were reporting as short positions.
This helps answer:
Was short interest unusually elevated?
Did reported short positions match actual market behavior?
Were there anomalies around key events?
⸻
2) TRF Data — HUGE 🧨
FINRA must produce Trade Reporting Facility (TRF) data.
Same date ranges.
This is likely one of the most important parts of the order.
Why?
TRF captures off-exchange / OTC reported trades, often associated with internalized trading / market maker activity.
Layman’s translation:
If the trustee is investigating alleged manipulation, this is where some of the most meaningful footprints could live.
Judge even ordered:
FINRA must expedite production due to time pressure.
That’s important.
⸻
3) Reg SHO Daily Short Sale Volume Data
FINRA must produce this too.
Same date ranges.
This helps show:
Daily short sale activity
Short-sale patterns
Whether activity spiked during sensitive periods
Not proof of wrongdoing by itself.
But valuable puzzle pieces.
⸻
Timing priority (important) 👀
📆FINRA agreed to prioritize production in this order:
MMAT 2023
MMAT 2024
MMAT 2022
MMAT 2021
Then TRCH
Then MMTLP
Why that matters:
The trustee likely wants the most actionable data first given statute/time pressure.
⸻
Judge explicitly referenced manipulation investigation
This is a key line.
Judge ordered FINRA to move quickly because of:
“potential manipulation of Meta stock.”
That’s notable.
This is not a finding that manipulation occurred.
But it confirms the court recognizes the trustee’s investigation as legitimate and time-sensitive.
⸻
Requests put on HOLD (not denied yet)
Requests 4–5:
Monthly OTC Summary Report Data
Weekly OTC Summary Report Data
Judge said:
Let’s wait.
Reason:
The trustee may get enough from Requests 1–3 first.
If more is still needed, the parties must meet and confer.
If they still fight, they can come back to court.
Translation:
This door is still open.
⸻
What FINRA WON
Requests 6–9 were QUASHED entirely.
Meaning:
FINRA does NOT have to produce whatever those categories were seeking.
So this was not a total trustee sweep.
⸻
Costs — trustee pays
Because FINRA is a nonparty, Rule 45 cost protections apply.
Meaning:
If producing the data is expensive or burdensome:
the trustee pays the production costs.
This matters because FINRA had argued massive burden.
The judge basically said:
“Produce it—but the estate can shoulder the cost.”
⸻
Protective order remains in place
Anything produced stays under the existing protective order.
Meaning:
This data is not automatically public.
It’s controlled discovery material.
So no—this does not mean shareholders get to immediately see raw trading records.