RE:Inducement to Sign the Option and Option Extension AgreementIzatt demands of Ucore to provide a document formally terminating the OTP and Research agreements sometime between May and December 2017.
Izatt again demands of Ucore to provide a document formally terminating the OTP and Research agreements on October 30, 2018.
On November 6, 2018 Izatt resigns from the Ucore Advisory Board because on legal advice both the Research and OTP agreements had been breached.
On November 7, 2018 Ucore issues press release about its intention to purchase IBC and exercise the OTP.
On November 14, 2018 Izatt again asks Ucore, via IBC's legal counsel, to immediately forward a letter to IBC to formally terminate the OTP and Research Agreements. Why ask again after Ucore has formally exercised the OTP?
Why didn't Izatt terminate the agreements at any one of the times before November 7, 2018? Was he induced or tricked to not do it?
My guess is that if Izatt terminated the agreements there would be legal or business ramifications to IBC that wouldn't exist if Ucore terminated the agreements. As an example perhaps if Ucore terminated the agreements then IBC would be legally able to pursue the multiple potential business opportunities that Ucore had made Izatt aware of that IBC wouldn't be legally able to pursue if IBC terminated the agreements.