TCB

Retired litigation attorney. 20+ year biotech focused investor.

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@MattNachtrab @Adrian_H Ah blocked me in 2021 when I questioned him about one of his fraud statements. Maybe he should have listened back then. Now he gets to defend those statements in court. Waiting on Judge to deny his motion to dismiss

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@jesse_brodkin We'll find out eventually. But for this disparaging statement you don't have any support that Northwestern is trying to save their reputation by distancing themselves from Sava or whether it was Sava that terminated Northwestern or some other innocent reason. $sava

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@jesse_brodkin @arkabagchi24 @LogarithmicDis @Adrian_H @ClicksAndHisses @DOJCrimDiv That's fair game. No different then you guys having to turn over all of your emails as well.

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@jesse_brodkin You do understand that the Judge was required to assume all allegations in Plaintiffs' lawsuit were true, right? Just like your mtn to dismiss where the Judge will assume all of $sava's statements are true? You'll get your chance at discovery too IMO.

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@Nemo_is_NoOne @ClicksAndHisses @jesse_brodkin I think the lawyers are drafting those disclosures, not Remi. Do you think that with any type of SEC investigation, lawyers would sign off on repeated SEC filings not disclosing a formal investigation and stating that it is voluntary at this point?

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@ClicksAndHisses @Nemo_is_NoOne @jesse_brodkin If subpoenas for testimony and documents were flying around as a result of a formal investigation, we would know about it.

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@ClicksAndHisses @Nemo_is_NoOne @jesse_brodkin Sava has consistently said documents were "requested" and they are voluntarily providing them. if there was a formal investigation with subpoenas, there would not be a request and it would not be voluntary.

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@ClicksAndHisses @Nemo_is_NoOne @jesse_brodkin To clarify, exemptions are "also" used for informal investigations as well as formal investigations

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@ClicksAndHisses @Nemo_is_NoOne @jesse_brodkin Incorrect. A formal SEC investigation would result in subpoenas for testimony and documents being sent out. That has not happened. Exemptions to FOIA are used for informal investigations which is where Sava still is.

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@Nemo_is_NoOne @jesse_brodkin So according to your math, Sava is 690 days in and hasn't even moved to a formal investigation (still informal with the SEC), subpoenas, wells notice, etc. white collar prosecutions at an all time low according to your article. Sava not a priority I guess?

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@Nemo_is_NoOne @StockJabber $sava choose to provide evidence in a court of law where both sides are subject to the penalties of perjury instead of having twitter scientist shorts twist it on social media.

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@Nemo_is_NoOne @MicrobiomDigest Not according to Remi, but according to Courts determining whether statements made are opinions as part of a scientific debate or false statements to make a profit as short sellers. Scientific debate argument doesn't help QCM $sava

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@Nemo_is_NoOne @MoralOverdraft @Adrian_H @ClicksAndHisses You do realize at this stage of the motions to dismiss that the Court assumes everything Sava said in its lawsuit is factually accurate (that is the required legal standard)? This is not the stage where either side has to lay out evidence. That time will come though.

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@ClicksAndHisses @Thatsregrettab1 I'll take the other side of "little to no chance of succeeding." You may be right on the recovering any capital part as the https://t.co/lU0kkIzYO8 defendants likely don't have the ability to cover any adverse judgment unless they have deep pockets supporting their actions

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@Nemo_is_NoOne @MoralOverdraft @Adrian_H @ClicksAndHisses Did you notice in Defendants' letter motion to avoid discovery that they acknowledged that not all parts of NY's Anti-Slapp provisions apply in Federal Court?

[TCB @TCBBIO]

@MoralOverdraft @Nemo_is_NoOne @Adrian_H @ClicksAndHisses Antislapp motions will be interesting. No punitive damages. Procedural rules in federal ct are more lenient than NY's antislapp law which makes it a little easier to get by those motions. Check out controlling case La Liberte v. Reid.