Top Tweets for #Mmat

🚨 MMAT / MMTLP / NBH In re: META MATERIALS INC. (Chapter 7) U.S. Bankruptcy Court – District of Nevada Case No. 24-50792-GS Document 2916 Filed: July 22, 2026 2916.pdf (Full filing attached via Dropbox) ⸻ ⚠️ Not legal advice - for discussion purposes. Actual legal filing attached - this is a layman’s summary. 👤 Who filed this? SCOTT TRAUDT (acting pro se, meaning he is representing himself) filed a Reply to the Trustee’s recent disclosures regarding Special Counsel Wes Christian and Christian Attar. 2916.pdf ⸻ 🤔 What is this filing REALLY about? In plain English… SCOTT TRAUDT is essentially telling the judge: The Court was not given the complete story about when Christian Attar began representing Next Bridge Hydrocarbons (NBH), and that matters because he was also working for the bankruptcy estate at the same time. The filing argues that this overlap should receive much closer scrutiny. ⸻ 📅 The Timeline (Simple Version) ✅ November 4, 2024 Christian Attar is approved as Special Counsel for the META bankruptcy estate. His job? 🕵️ Investigate: ✔️ Stock fraud ✔️ Market manipulation ✔️ Recover money for the bankruptcy estate. 2916.pdf ⸻ 📅 Approximately December 2024 According to later sworn disclosures, Christian Attar was already working for Next Bridge Hydrocarbons. This date becomes one of the biggest issues in the filing. ⸻ 📅 February 18, 2025 NBH publicly announces hiring Christian Attar. SCOTT TRAUDT argues: The public announcement came after the representation had already begun. ⸻ 📅 July 1, 2026 A supplemental declaration states under oath that NBH actually hired Christian Attar approximately December 2024. SCOTT TRAUDT argues this creates disclosure questions because it suggests overlapping engagements. 2916.pdf ⸻ ⚠️ Why does SCOTT TRAUDT say this matters? His argument is basically: If one lawyer is: 🏛 Working for the bankruptcy estate AND 🏢 Working for Next Bridge ➡️ the Court deserves full disclosure. He argues that everyone should know: ✔️ when it started ✔️ how long it lasted ✔️ whether conflicts existed ✔️ whether additional disclosures should have been made. ⸻ 📋 What is SCOTT TRAUDT asking the Judge to do? He’s NOT asking the Court to decide who is right today. Instead he’s asking the judge to order things like: 🔍 More disclosure 📂 Production of engagement records 🔒 Review certain documents privately (“in camera”) 💰 Consider freezing additional estate payments until the issue is resolved ⚖️ Determine whether any conflict or disclosure rules were violated. 2916.pdf ⸻ 👀 What can we expect next? Several possibilities: ✅ Option 1 (Most Likely) The Trustee and/or Special Counsel file another written response explaining why they believe their disclosures were sufficient. ⸻ ✅ Option 2 The judge reviews the papers and decides: ✔️ no further action OR ✔️ additional disclosures are required. ⸻ ✅ Option 3 The Court orders additional records produced or reviewed privately before making a decision. ⸻ ✅ Option 4 (Least Certain) If the judge concludes there are unresolved disclosure or conflict issues, the Court could order additional proceedings, but whether that happens will depend on the Court’s evaluation of the evidence and applicable bankruptcy rules. ⸻ 🚨 Bottom Line 📌 This filing does not mean wrongdoing has been established. 📌 It is an argument made by SCOTT TRAUDT asking the Court to examine disclosure and potential conflict issues more closely. 📌 The next step is for the Court to determine whether any additional action is warranted based on the filings and responses. ⸻ ⚖️ Not legal advice. This is a plain-language summary of a court filing and its procedural posture, not a determination that the allegations are true. https://t.co/4WUamQ6a0D