Cyberlux Corp New (PK) (CYBL) Quote

what is he talking about? in reference to Autobot>>>>
https://stocktwits.com/symbol/CYBL

I THINK COMPANY IS GOING CANADA'S WAY

AMAZING Q'S

AMAZING Q'S

https://www.stockscores.com/charts/charts/?ticker=CYBL

Question for the Board:

Now that the Attorney Letter has been filed, are we any closer to the CE removal? And if so, this year, next year, etc?

Where is your fairy dust?

Someone else in the thread asked what's meant by a judge's dismissal of a case "without prejudice..." All I did was explain the meaning of that legal term. For the record I have MILLIONS of reasons why I want Cyberlux to succeed--if you catch my drift--so what are you talking about? Also, how does the tag "Cashmagnet" infer a bearish outlook on anything?

That is my assumption as well. That, or compliance with OTCM. Or both.

Sounds reasonable and quite good as well.

He is the Chief Revenue Officer for Cyberlux. They probably signed some major new contract.

Agree. Care to speculate on what this might mean?

Expect the unexpected. Life is full of wonderful things waiting to surprise you. @MDSAdvisor @CyberluxC— Bill Maadarani (@BillMaadar60848) September 13, 2024

This has me excited!!

Mythic,,,take all else but don't take the bed! :)


Hang in there...I am.

Does not really deviate from what I stated, but OK.

So why are you here? Why so bearish as your tag signifies?

When a sitting judge dismisses a case "without prejudice" it means that s\he will not oppose subsequent hearings brought by plaintiffs either from the prosecutor's office (or from defense counsel). So in this context that ruling leaves open the possibility of follow-up lawsuit(s) for the same issue(s)...

there is no bed.

mark moved it to his personal account already. (allegedly)

Makes sense, piss all over your bed because you are pissed...

who said I wasn't a shareholder?

who said I didn't want the CE removed?

it would be great if the CE came off so I can get out of this shit show. But with the the lack of transparency, legal actions, debts, and odd money movement I just don't see the CE being removed. especially when they leave obvious information out of the letter!

two years ago - I would've said skies the limit!

now, I think it's just a big pile of steaming lies and BS while the management hides. I consider my holdings a total loss that I can't even write off and I'm pissed.

MythicWatcher...like most of us on this board, we are shareholders.

Tell us, though: Why are you here? Why do you not want CYBL to succeed? Why do you not want the CE removed?

Since that was Cyberlux's response in moving it to Federal Court and I looked it up, that's what it looks like to me - forum shopping. It sounds like you're also the Johannes user from Twitter. I read through everything and made my decision. I have 5Mill Shares of the company so I want to see them succeed.

If I were a Cyberlux insider I would have told them just to pay the money and get through with this. As someone has read everything I'm entitled to post my opinion on the subject here too.

you're forgetting about the failure to comply with the acceleration clause of the settlement agreement that states;

"Defendants agree to accelerate and pay the full outstanding balance of all sums owed under the consent Judgement up to a total of FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000) per drone sold within twenty-one (21) days of Defendants, or any parent's, subsidiary's. affiliates. or assign's first receipt of payment for any contract to purchase drone aircraft"

and since, at least according to OTC filings Cyberlux HAS sold drones, they are obligated to PAY THE SUM DUE IN FULL.

you're also forgetting to mention that the initial payment of $150k was never made in accordance with the settlement agreement.

its interesting that you use the precise same term "forum shopping" as Cyberlux uses. I can only assume therefore that you are a Cyberlux insider working to steer public opinion on the matter.

They're all the same case. The plaintiffs are just forum shopping hoping to find a judge to allow them to enforce a judgement, when in reality, if you look at the payments that have been made, Cyberlux is ahead of payment schedule. I've read through it all, in all of the various cases. It's all one case. Cyberlux does have a countersuit against them in VA as well.

2024 Attorney Letter

Link: https://t.co/2PK4zxGF0X$CYBL pic.twitter.com/MpzNlOjVMg— Cyberlux Corporation - $CYBL (@CyberluxC) September 10, 2024

Letter is up!

Attorney Letter uploaded: https://www.otcmarkets.com/otcapi/company/financial-report/412259/content

The 3rd case does seem effectively closed pending the filings of the other case. They are essentially one in the same in regards to claims. It is all in regards to payment of the original settlement. I did upload all of the files to the shared folder, but the last file 24-00196__0035.0 is the conclusion of that case.

No problem. I just did the 2 week free trial and downloaded all of the docs allowed that I could for current cases. I also, have the perception that this case was settled in VA and for some reason the plaintiff is trying to file in CA now.

There are 3 open cases per Pacer. Two are from Atlantic Wave. Anyone, without paying, can search Pacer and see that for themselves. I will add the other for review.

Active businesses have lawsuits, it happens. I was an exec for a distribution company for 13y and managed about $100M/yr. in total business at the max, averaging $50M/yr. We were almost constantly in a suit or two either as plaintiffs or defendants. I just searched Tesla and they are a party in 121 cases filed just this year...

Thanks, Semper Fi. I do not have access to Pacer, so this is extremely beneficial. I will save link and look for other updates and docs.

Regarding the lawsuits, please correct me if I am wrong, but on the Atlantic one that was dismissed without prejudice, which I believes means that it is essentially over and initial settlement is what both parties are governed by.

As to Rosen, I don't think he has much there, other than collect what he lent CYBL. Aside from these 2 lawsuits, the 2 or 3 bashers on X claim that there is a 3rd lawsuit, but I don't see that on this list.

Bottom Line: It seems to me that a few people are coming for Mark and CYBL now that they have over $30 million in the bank.

What most people don't know or care to know is that over the years, Downing, Schmidt, and Ringo lent the company millions of dollars to keep afloat. Some of the alleged money transfers are probably related to settlement of those personal loans to the company. IMO.

I see what you are saying, UAS. Unfortunately, it took almost 3 months last time for AL to be re-issued, presumably after OTCM reviewed everything.

Thank for your feedback!

Yeah...I think that is part of the issue as well. He has debt financing where he some of his shares only convert with a stock price of $0.25.

If anyone wants to review all of the active court case docs they are shared at the Google Drive link below. I suggest reading all of the docs to base your opinion instead of a couple selected clips posted by a short seller on X.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/18mMDM80aAHxxoshyGSEjpcmb0yEqtuuW?usp=drive_link

https://x.com/MullenSCAM/status/1831552363930300514/photo/1

https://x.com/MullenSCAM/status/1831552363930300514/photo/2

AL is 100% needed with an amended annual report. I think they're waiting on the OTCM to give the filings a thumbs up prior to posting an attorney letter. They didn't post one last time, and required amended filings (which means OTC reviewed them, told them they needed to adjust some things and refile). I think they're doing the same thing here.

Issuing at artificially depressed values. Maybe this is what Brett is bent about?

Apologies. Corrected to read: SEC compliant.

Gosox...the answer is that the company has and continues to issue shares to the insiders, whether the Defense Advisory Board members, officers of the company, and/or to all the new employees coming into the CYBL family. They are issuing, not buying/selling them.

At some point, the stock will have to trade because of all the shares owned by the insiders. I have zero doubt about that. It is only a question whether it will be done via the oversight of OTCM or under another exchange when the company becomes SEC complaint.

Well, Attorney Letter did not come out last week. Not sure what the rules and/or regulations are with OTCM. Maybe AL is not needed, if there is no change of opinion by the attorney. Who can answer definitively whether AL is needed or not for FY 2023 after the annual report revision was made?

i didn''t see this

Interesting theory. How do they accumulate shares, though, while trading is limited with the CE on?

There is only one scenario I see where Cyberlux benefits by intentionally keeping the publicly traded stock in CE while they are doing so well in revs. At some point they want to benefit from offloading some shares they all own into the market. So, the one case this may be beneficial is if they know there are bigger and better things in the future and they want to keep it CE to somehow collect shares at the resulting suppressed pricing. At some point they need an exit and they aren't doing that at current value.

That's been my thoughts exactly. It seems like they have a way of making a lot of money without the investors being involved in the profits. Meanwhile , the investors are stuck with a stock that's to low to sell while at the same time not being able to purchase more shares either. All this convenience built right in for CYBL profits not being reported and not being a part of the stock price. In other words it's a comfortable fix.

CYBL
Cyberlux Corp New (PK)
0.003
0.0001 (3.45%)
Volume: 193,286
Day Range: 0.0021 - 0.003
Last Trade Time: 3:54:23 PM EDT

Seems like someone does not want ce to come off, lol. They sell on the open, totally useless fool(s).😉

Seems like someone does not want ce to come off, lol. They sell on the open, totally useless fool(s).😉

Gosox...he said Pink Current. Pink Current is not a guarantee of CE removal.
We shall see.

I think AL will be out today.

Things may be turning here. Let's see if UAS' recent post about the CE removal, following the attorney's letter being posted, holds up.

I'm feeling optimistic about it since he's someone with aotof personal experience in the area of drones,etc.

it seems like mgmt doesn't care about u.s.a. shareholders. not even considering us.

SHAREHOLDERS PAYING BIG PENATLY FOR MGMT MISTAKES

Ukrainian Ask–2.5 Million Drones


Big chance for Cyberlux. China bans the sale of drone parts to Ukraine as of September 1.
A Ukrainian drone specialist writes about it on his Telegram post.
There will be a shortage of drones and the price will skyrocket.

https://t.me/robert_magyar/918

"The Hungarian" added that development in Ukraine is among the best in the world, but they are assembled on imported Chinese components. In this regard, he notes, there will be few drones, while their price will increase significantly.

https://inforesist.org/ua/u-zsu-zayavili-shho-cherez-novi-eksportni-obmezhennya-z-boku-kitayu-droni-stanut-dorozhchimi/

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/02/europe/ukraine-big-drone-attack-russia-intl-hnk/index.html

Demand for drones is huge! Go cybl!