"because they are convinced there is only one stock in their creepy world: Abat"
You do realize, you are describing the ABAT longs; continually buying&holding only ABAT, with no signs of selling, and never even remotely talking about another stock as an investment unless they are targeting 'basher' posts about a non-ABAT stock.
Then you have the previous ABAT longs who started talking about other stocks, who finally decided to cash out their ABAT stock and invest in those other stocks.
Finally, the 'bashers' who identified ABAT as a bad investment years ago, have freely used available cash to trade and profit on other stocks during the past 3+ years, of which there are countless posts documenting this.
Fact is, there is no chance of you making a profit, until you actually sell your shares.
"If the sec is intent on punishing abat"
IMO, you have the wrong idea.
Any SEC action would be a result of ABAT's refusal to not follow the rules, rules that apply to ALL publicly held companies.
ABAT is not being singled out or unfairly targeted.
ABAT has simply joined the list of non-filers, because that was ABAT's choice.
And ANY non-filer will be subject to the SAME consequences.
Much more likely some share holders selling, taking what profits they can, not wanting to hold over the weekend.
Or do you believe once you buy a stock, you never sell it?
"Oh, and my feelings are so hurt by the 'thumbs-down' votes on my comments."
I hope you can deal with that better than FooFoo, who ended up in the hospital!
"They were darlings of the Chinese Olympics"
I did an internet search, but could not find out anything about these "Chinese Olympics".
What is that?
I have several friends who are Chinese, and they might be interested in trying to qualify, though they never heard of it either.
ABAT applies to NASDAQ.
NASDAQ requires ABAT to verify cash before allowing ABAT to be listed.
FooFoo responds by experiencing a panic attack, goes to hospital, takes photo ops with actual sick people while there; company goes silent again.
Would one of the pumptards care to correct 'rwmmail's erroneous statement about the 'short attack' occurring during the fall?
This coming from the same poster who says ABAT never issued any kind of buyback back in 2011, after the 'short attack' and before the completion of ABAT's new battery facility, despite ABAT filing an 8-K on June 30, 2011 stating a $10 million buyback program.
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.
I can only imagine what 2 people would have rated 'rwmmail's flat out LIE with a thumbs-up.
Dumb and Dumber did return to the movie theaters recently.
Interesting you should bring that up.
Here it is, quoted from the 8-K filing date June 30, 2011:
"ITEM 8.01 Other Events
On June 30, 2011 the Registrant issued a press release advising that the Board of Directors has adopted a $10 million share repurchase program."
That was well over 3 years ago, when the stock was trading just over $1 per share.
But today's mention states 5 million "shares", not dollars:
"plan to buy back up to 5 million ABAT common shares over the next 12 months. The common stock to be repurchased would represent 6.6% of the total shares outstanding"
I find this odd, because any share repurchase plan I recall ever reading has ALWAYS been depicted in monetary terms, which would make sense because you have to account for it in your financial statements.
And it is clearly not an oversight of leaving out a dollar sign, when you read the entire statement.
Then there is the follow-on sentence further down in the statement, which most certainly does not bode well in comparison to how much 'confidence' the company had in themselves over 3 years ago (a few months AFTER the 'short attack'), since which time they were meant to have continued making profits all the while:
"This planned share repurchase program signals a high level of confidence in ABAT's growth prospects as well as in our continued ability to consistently generate solid operating profit and cash flow."
Of course, the pumptards on this board will reply with their meaningless 'you are a basher' type replies; but, that doesn't change the facts.
Now WHO can you think of, that might be holding millions of share of ABAT, that would want to get rid of them before they get revoked by the SEC? Someone is selling the shares people are buying, right?
"Do you think, there was a bench trial on November 18th? Yes or No?"
If there was no Motion for Continuance submitted AND granted, then the bench trial would have occurred as scheduled.
As twist.nrev pointed out, we will not know 100% what happened until we see the court records updated with the facts.
However, if I were to put up my best guess, being the trial date has passed and no Motion for Continuance accompanied with a new trial date has showed up in PACER, I would guess the bench trial did occur on November 18th.
And in reference to your statement, "Instead we will perhaps see a prosecution for committing perjury."; fact is, the courts are NOT quick to prosecute such things...I GUARANTEE there will be NO such prosecution as you suggest.
As I already stated, what the book outlines as POSSIBLE court actions (better read each word in your book more carefully next time), and what ACTUALLY takes place in the courtroom, will be a surprise to you, when you finally make your way to an active courtroom and observe the 'real world' process.
I have been through the process personally.
I have been to a Management Conference.
The "Scheduling Order" you refer to is a joke - it simply refers to the fact that a Final Hearing was scheduled for the case ... did you think it was more than that?
I have been in front of both, the Hearing Officer on multiple occasions, and in front of the Judge with a Motion to Vacate (of which I won my Motion against the Department of Revenue, which is rare; you might find out why this is, one day).
Think of the Judge like a CEO of a large corporation.
The CEO has a lot of people working under him/her to take care of many court decisions and paperwork.
The CEO (Judge) simply makes their presence known, signs off on paperwork upon which court decisions were made by Hearing Officers or the like, and will hear any Motions that challenge those court decisions, to which he/she signed his/her name to.
Some of you have the wrong idea, thinking all of these court cases involve only the 2 opposing parties and a single Judge; but, this is NOT the case.
So you are saying, a judge's "Scheduling Order" requires a "Joint Pre-Trial Order", "Exhibits", and "Findings of Facts or Conclusions of Law".
You obviously have absolutely ZERO experience pertaining to a US court case.
I hope your second law class actually takes you into an active court room, so you can observe the REAL process that goes on.
But lets get back to what a derivative action is exactly:
derivative action n. a lawsuit brought by a corporation shareholder against the directors, management and/or other shareholders of the corporation, for a failure by management. In effect, the suing shareholder claims to be acting on behalf of the corporation, because the directors and management are failing to exercise their authority for the benefit of the company and all of its shareholders. This type of suit often arises when there is fraud, mismanagement, self-dealing and/or dishonesty which are being ignored by officers and the Board of Directors of a corporation.
And you believe a "Joint Pre-Trial Order", "Exhibits", and "Findings of Facts or Conclusions of Law" are all necessary requirements for this action to proceed?
Where in the world did you come up with that idea?
From watching every episode of the television shows, "Perry Mason" and "Law & Order" which deal with Criminal lawsuits?
"they have the option to sue for damages re 'short attack' and NASDAQ support of 'shorts' rumors."
What a dreamer you are.
1) NASDAQ makes the rules for NASDAQ listings, NOT ABAT
2) ABAT received a Warning letter from NASDAQ, that ABAT would be delisted for specific reasons. ABAT then had the option to reply to that Warning letter, which would have resulted in ABAT being listed on NASDAQ for at least another 6 months.
ABAT chose to NOT reply and be delisted ASAP!
Your post is nothing but an idiotic dream that will NEVER happen.
Especially since ABAT intentionally caused the 'damage' to their share price themselves, by not replying to the Warning, knowing once the stock was delisted from NASDAQ, the stock price would lose enormous value; thus, 'throwing the shareholders under the bus' so to speak.
Shareholders during that time period of ABAT being delisted would have a better chance at suing ABAT for the damages resulting from ABAT's intentional negligence.
"Have you seen Joint Pre-Trial Orders? No. Have you seen any exhibits? No. Have you seen any Findings of Facts or Conclusions of Law? No."
Exactly what kind of trial are you referring to?
Because NONE of this existed in the drawn-out case I was personally involved with during the past year.