ann out re immunoxel, page-31

Peter BOONEN?s directorships involving Immune Network and Zodiac Capital have been discussed on this forum either later half of last year or earlier this year and I see nothing new discovered here, hence don?t understand the sudden fuss.

The split rights to develop and market Immunoxel have also been discussed on this forum previously e.g. my post of 30/3/11 : Re Products, Potential Products and appeared in a previous STI release prior to that, (and it is unfortunate the more recent STI release on this talks about Russia and ?some countries?, leaving things unclear. So again there is nothing new or unexpected in that.

Further if you read the references in my last post completely, it should help make it clearer as to why the split existed and why it is now such a very good thing that STI is in partnership with Immune Network re the future global development and marketing of Immunoxel that otherwise may have causes conflict and/or subsequent long and costly legal battles to sort out. I suggest unless you are also a very highly trained and experienced legal officer in patents and commercial law and/or were present in the Ukraine when the split rights were agreed to and hence have a full understanding of the legalities and loopholes involved, law often hinging on the exact words used or written and their interpretation according to differing legal, we can be barking up the wrong tree.

Re lawsuit reference. More than happy to bow to superior knowledge or skill in exacting an outcome re this, but having read the article you referenced, re Prospect Capital Group V?s World Callnet directors, of which (a Peter BOONEN was allegedly a party to ?),in October, 2000 (over 10 years ago ?), all my general googling re this, and in particular my on line searching in the Delaware Court System records, has failed to come up with any reference to this, nor any outcome. However, I do not claim expertise in that area,
Regardless, this leaves me perplexed and questioning the veracity of the article. Leaves me wondering if correct at all, or if it was correct, whether it did or did not involved STI?s Peter BOONEN in any potential illegal activity, and if it did, was it with his knowledge and illegal intention, or just nominated as a director, or was dropped for want of proof etc. Have you got anything substantial on this please, as many articles get written about many people and companies that are being blamed, but many are never substantiated.