On one side that's awesome - congratulations! on the other it should just have been ended not postponed! Is this delay tactic? A way for people to loose interest and it just be forgotten about?
I agree, however they are reviewing the original order which may now be able to be scientifically critiqued, whereas it was not allowed to be reviewed before as they originally lost their appeal.
On one side that's awesome - congratulations! on the other it should just have been ended not postponed! Is this delay tactic? A way for people to loose interest and it just be forgotten about?
I agree, however they are reviewing the original order which may now be able to be scientifically critiqued, whereas it was not allowed to be reviewed before as they originally lost their appeal.
Thank you for update - that is great news as well!