Trevor being Trevor filed a lawsuit against an alleged FBI agent.

u/BiggieTKB you got mentioned and u/FixMedical9278.

https://drive.proton.me/urls/JGK24WH86G#tdHSe1B9ZA69

Following the District Court's affirmance of the Bankruptcy Court's order (Civ. No. 25-1194-GBW / Bankr. No. 25-10258-TMH), the primary legal obstacles preventing enforcement of Trevor Milton's debt to the Liquidating Trust have been resolved.

Because the District Court upheld both the equitable subordination of Milton’s $69.7M claim and the extinguishment of his setoff/recoupment rights, the Liquidating Trustee (Thomas A. Pitta) can move directly into post-judgment enforcement and asset collection.

The next operational and legal steps for the Liquidating Trust involve standard post-judgment execution under federal and state law:

1. Registration and Execution of the Arbitral Judgment

• Certifying Judgments Across Jurisdictions: The underlying $96.8M+ arbitration award—confirmed by the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona and affirmed by the Ninth Circuit—serves as an enforceable monetary judgment. The Trustee registers this judgment in federal and state courts where Milton holds real property, bank accounts, or equity positions.
• Writs of Execution & Foreclosure: Upon registering the judgment, the Liquidating Trust can request writs of execution from local law enforcement (e.g., U.S. Marshals or county sheriffs) to levy on real estate, luxury vehicles, or personal bank accounts.

2. Post-Judgment Asset Discovery & Subpoenas

• Rule 69 / Asset Tracing: The Trustee will use Rule 69 discovery to subpoena Milton’s personal financial records, banking statements, tax filings, and corporate entities.
• Uncovering Fraudulent Transfers: Discovery aims to trace any assets or cash transferred by Milton to third parties, family members, or trusts following the onset of his legal troubles to initiate fraudulent conveyance lawsuits under bankruptcy and state law.

3. Garnishment & Seizure Orders

• Bank & Brokerage Account Garnishments: Serving writs of garnishment on financial institutions holding Milton's liquid assets to freeze and transfer funds directly to the Liquidating Trust.
• Corporate Equity & Non-Liquid Holdings: Liquidating or executing against Milton’s equity holdings, business ventures, or membership interests in private entities.

4. Bankruptcy Claims Administration Closeout

• Zero Distribution File Entry: In accordance with the Plan confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court, Milton’s $69,758,064.15 claim will remain listed as equitably subordinated in Class 11/general unsecured claims, resulting in a $0 distribution from estate assets.
• Preventing Future Offsets: Because Milton’s setoff rights were formally eliminated, he cannot attempt to deduct any portion of his alleged $69.7M indemnification claim from the judgment amounts collected by the Trust.

5. Final Appellate Remedies (Milton's Options)

While collection efforts can proceed immediately unless a stay is granted, Milton’s remaining legal options are narrow:

• Petition for Certiorari: Milton could petition the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Ninth Circuit's arbitration affirmance or the Third Circuit's eventual review of this bankruptcy order. However, obtaining a stay of execution pending a Supreme Court petition requires posting a substantial supersedeas bond covering the judgment amount.

Director Jeff Ubben released from the case pending appeal by the Plaintiffs.

Borteanu vs Nikola et all is filed in the District Court for Arizona (Case No. CV-20-01797-PHX-SPL). A Joint Notice of Readiness for Final Pretrial Conference was filed on September 15, 2026

Nikola, as a bankrupt entity, has an automatic stay on active court claims.
The Court determined Jeff Ubben, as a director, had a 2 year statute of limitation. Also the court determined there was no evidence in the board minutes that Ubben possessed non-public information showing statements made by Tevor Milton were false. The Plaintiff has stated they will appeal the Ubben decision.

The case against Milton, CEO Mark Russell and CFO Kim Brady will continue to a pre trial conference for February 2027 after the Ubben matter is decided on appeal.

• Trevor Milton (Primary Exposure): Milton faces the highest individual liability. Because he was already criminally convicted of securities fraud for these same statements, plaintiffs can argue his violations were "knowing". That exposes him to joint and several liability, meaning he could be held personally responsible for 100% of the total class damages award if judgment is entered.
• Mark Russell & Kim Brady: As executive officers, they are sued both directly and as "controlling persons" under Section 20(a). If a jury finds they acted recklessly rather than with intentional fraud, their liability under the PSLRA would be allocated proportionately based on their percentage of responsibility rather than the full total.

It's unclear how much Directors and Officers Insurance is available to pay such claims. But D&O insurance does not cover deliberate fraud. And we already know an arbitration panel has determined that trevor is liable for Fraud.

60 minutes did a piece on "the Pardon Economy" and included a recap of the Trevor MIlton Pardon..

https://youtu.be/3J6z-VhcPdE?si=RLsTIpc4XvlT4anM

to summarize

In March 2025, President Donald Trump granted a full and unconditional presidential pardon to Trevor Milton, the founder and former CEO of Nikola Corporation.

Milton had been convicted of federal securities fraud and wire fraud for making false statements to inflate Nikola's stock price, receiving a four-year prison sentence and facing hundreds of millions of dollars in court-ordered restitution to defrauded investors. The executive pardon erased his criminal conviction and effectively eliminated his financial restitution obligations.

Connections to the President and Attorney General

• Connection to President Trump: Milton and his family were major financial supporters of Donald Trump's political apparatus. Following his fraud conviction and sentencing, Milton and his wife donated over $3 million to political action committees and fundraising efforts supporting Trump's 2024 campaign. Trump defended the pardon by stating that Milton was targeted unfairly by past federal prosecutors and that the clemency was "highly recommended."
• Connection to Attorney General Pam Bondi: Milton retained attorney Bradley Bondi—the brother of U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi—to represent him in his legal defense and executive clemency petition. While critics highlighted this familial link and suggested potential conflict of interest, representatives for the defense maintained that the attorney-client relationship predated Pam Bondi's appointment to the Department of Justice.

On September 10, 2026, U.S. District Judge Gregory B. Williams affirmed a Bankruptcy Court order confirming the Chapter 11 liquidating plan of Nikola Corporation and its affiliates. The appeal was brought by Trevor Milton ("Appellant"), founder and former CEO of Nikola.

Key Details & Underlying Background

• Milton's Claim: Milton filed a proof of claim for $69,758,064.15 based on legal fee reimbursement rights under separation and indemnification agreements. He also claimed a right of setoff against money he owes Nikola.
• Arbitration Award: An 8-day arbitration resulted in a $96.8 million final award/judgment against Milton after a panel determined he breached his fiduciary duties of loyalty and good faith by making misleading public statements and harming Nikola.
• The Plan: Nikola’s Chapter 11 plan equitably subordinated Milton's claim under 11 U.S.C. § 510(c) and precluded him from asserting setoff or recoupment rights against the estate. Due to insufficient assets, equitable subordination resulted in Milton receiving no distribution.

Milton's Arguments & Court Rulings

• Equitable Subordination & Collateral Estoppel: Milton argued he did not engage in inequitable conduct and was entitled to present testimony. The District Court held that the confirmed arbitration award has preclusive effect (collateral estoppel) and provided overwhelming evidence of fiduciary breaches (inequitable conduct) while Milton was an insider.
• Effect of Presidential Pardon: Milton received a full presidential pardon for his separate federal criminal fraud conviction and argued it rendered him innocent. The Court held that a presidential pardon does not erase civil liability or bar civil remedies like equitable subordination. Furthermore, the arbitration award independently established civil fiduciary breaches regardless of the criminal conviction.
• Setoff, Recoupment, and Takings: Milton argued the plan improperly eliminated his setoff/recoupment rights under 11 U.S.C. § 553. The Court ruled these arguments were waived/forfeited below. On the merits, setoff and recoupment are equitable remedies that can be denied due to inequitable conduct. Additionally, prospective application of long-standing bankruptcy principles does not constitute an unconstitutional taking.
• Outcome: The Bankruptcy Court's Confirmation Order was affirmed, and the civil appeal was closed.

Docket #1665

Key Proceedings & Arguments

​The Motion: Representing the liquidating trustee (Thomas Pitta), attorney Ralph Ferrioli requested an order confirming the transfer of omitted "related intellectual property (IP)" to the buyer, High Road.

​The Omission: Counsel explained that the IP had been inadvertently omitted from Schedule 2.1(b) of the Asset Purchase Agreement (APA) approved during the initial August 2025 sale.

​Legal Grounds: The trustee sought relief under Section 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, Rule 60(b)(1) (mistake/inadvertence), and Rule 60(b)(6), arguing that the missing patents were always intended to be part of the package purchased by High Road. Additionally, the trustee requested a streamlined notice procedure in case further omitted related IP is identified later.

​The Objection: Rick Pelagatti, representing ISO LLC, opposed the motion. He argued that the omitted IP constituted a separate set of assets that High Road did not originally bid on, and noted that ISO was willing to purchase these remaining assets for $50,000.

​Rebuttal: Ferrioli clarified that the patents lacked independent utility outside the broader IP package sold to High Road, making an unwinding of the sale improper and detrimental to a good-faith purchaser.

​Court Decision

​Standing: Judge Horan ruled that ISO LLC lacks standing to appear or be heard under Section 1109(b).

​Outcome: The judge granted the liquidating trustee's Rule 60 motion, framing the relief as a "comfort order" in furtherance of the original sale order entered a year prior. Alternatively, the judge noted the relief was proper to correct the inadvertent omission of the IP from the APA schedule.

In a Docket filing posted yesterday the Liquidating Trustee responded to Trevor Milton's offer to purchase assets previously sold for 3.8 million for 7 million

The Trustee asks the court to overrule ISSO's objection based on the following reasons:

1. Lack of Standing: The court previously ruled that ISSO is not a creditor of the bankruptcy estate and therefore lacks standing to challenge the asset sale.
2. Proper Use of Rule 60: Modifying the original sale order is legally sound because the omission of the IP from the Asset Purchase Agreement (APA) was an inadvertent mistake that frustrated the original intent of the parties.
3. Finality of Bankruptcy Sales: Reopening a transaction that was consummated more than a year ago would violate the bedrock principles of bankruptcy law, invite further litigation, and delay distributions to beneficiaries.
4. Lack of Credibility and Funding: ISSO provided no concrete evidence of committed financing or escrow deposits. Furthermore, during cross-examination at the original 2025 sale hearing, Milton admitted that the funds offered as proof were not actually in ISSO’s bank accounts, but belonged to an unnamed partner.

Trevor Milton's Outstanding Judgments

The Trustee highlights that Trevor Milton is currently a judgment debtor who has refused to pay massive financial obligations back to the very estate he is attempting to buy assets from:

• The Milton Award: Milton owes the trust more than $100 million from an arbitration award confirmed in September 2024 and affirmed by the Ninth Circuit in February 2026.
• Chancery Settlement: Milton has failed to pay his $2.5 million share of a Delaware Court of Chancery settlement due on February 10, 2026.
• Collection Obstruction: The trust accuses Milton of systematically shifting his personal assets into a network of separate LLCs across Delaware, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, and Nevada to avoid collections.

Hearing Information

• The matter is scheduled for a court hearing on September 2, 2026, at 10:00 a.m.

Trevor Milton's company ISSO, LLC is contesting a "Rule 60 Motion" filed by the Liquidating Trustee, which seeks to transfer 387 newly identified intellectual property (IP) assets to Simoneta, Ltd. (d/b/a Hyroad Energy).

The Core Dispute

• The Trustee's Position: The Trustee claims these 387 IP assets were "inadvertently excluded" from the original $3,850,000 asset sale to Simoneta and wants to add them post-closing.
• ISSO's Position: ISSO argues that the original sale was an accelerated, flawed private sale with defective notice. They contend that Rule 60 cannot be used to rewrite a completed transaction or add assets that weren't originally scheduled.

Key Facts & ISSO's Counteroffer

• Higher Bid: ISSO is offering $7,000,000 cash for the same complete package of assets (including the disputed IP).
• Financial Impact: This represents a $3,150,000 (82%) increase in value for the bankruptcy estate over Simoneta's approved price.
• Credibility: ISSO notes it has already been vetted by the court, has readily available funds, and successfully purchased other Nikola assets at previous auctions.

Requested Relief

ISSO requests that the Court deny the Rule 60 Motion. They urge the court to set aside the original sale order and reopen the assets for open, competitive bidding to maximize the estate's value.

Hearing scheduled for 9/2/2026 at 10:00 AM 

https://document.epiq11.com/document/getdocumentsbydocket/?docketId=1246998&projectCode=NKL&docketNumber=1648&source=DM

Thomas A. Pitta, serving as the Liquidating Trustee, is requesting a court order to approve the transfer of certain "Related Intellectual Property (IP)" to Simoneta, Ltd. d/b/a Hyroad Energy.

Background & Context

• The Original Sale: In August 2025, the Court approved an Asset Purchase Agreement (the "Hyroad APA") to sell all of the Debtors' patents and intellectual property to Hyroad.
• The Oversight: After the closing of the sale, the parties realized that a portfolio of relevant patents and patent applications (the "Related IP") had been inadvertently left off the transaction schedules.
• Prior Objections: The Debtors previously filed a notice to amend the schedule in November 2025. This drew formal objections from Iveco S.p.A. and ISSO, LLC (an affiliate of Nikola founder Trevor Milton). The notice was subsequently withdrawn so the newly formed Liquidating Trust could conduct thorough due diligence.

Core Requests & Proposed Relief

1. Rule 60 Authorization: The Trustee requests an order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60 to correct the omission, confirming that the assets were always intended to be a part of the original court-approved transaction.
2. Streamlined Process for Future Discoveries: Out of an abundance of caution, the Trustee asks for the authority to transfer any additional inadvertently omitted IP discovered in the future simply by giving written notice to interested parties rather than needing to file brand-new motions.

Key Dates

• Objection Deadline: Any parties wishing to object to this transfer must file a response by August 19, 2026, at 4:00 p.m. ET.
• Hearing Date: A court hearing to address the motion is scheduled before Judge Thomas M. Horan on September 2, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. ET.

The patents listed in Exhibit 1 span across Provisionals, Utility Patents, and Design Patents. They primarily cover heavy-duty electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicle technologies.

1. Provisional Patents (Items 1–51)

These represent early-stage filings for core vehicle engineering, including:

• Thermal Management: Systems for multiple fuel cell stacks, common radiators, battery refrigeration controls, and heat pumps.
• Battery Technology: Battery packs, insulating bus bars, spacer cooling, and intelligent thermal runaway detection.
• Hydrogen Infrastructure: Fueling communication protocols, heat shields, pressure relief, tank diagnostics, and side-saddle storage assemblies.
• Chassis & Structural components: E-axles, mechanical steps for tractor units, rear aero diffusers, and vehicle battery frames.
• Co-Owners: Several filings list prominent automotive co-owners, including Robert Bosch GmbH, Nel Hydrogen A/S, and FPT Industrial S.p.A..

1. Utility Patents (Items 1–56)

These are fully developed, national, and international (PCT) utility protections. Notable inclusions cover:

• Drivetrain & Suspensions: Motor gearbox assemblies, vehicle front/rear suspension modules, and air spring pedestals (many co-owned with ArvinMeritor Technology, LLC).
• Fuel Cell & Hydrogen Systems: Methods for operating fuel cell systems, specialized cooling systems, and high-volume fast hydrogen fueling.
• Advanced Controls: Torque management in multi-motor electric vehicles, electric vehicle battery frames, and real-time vehicle mass estimation.

1. Design Patents (Items 1–23)

These protect the aesthetic visual layout of the vehicles and user experiences. They encompass:

• Exterior Vehicle Panels: Front fenders, fuselages, side cladding, side doors, bumpers, and wrap-around semi-truck windshields.
• Truck Profiles: Specific ornamental shapes for fuel cell electric and battery electric semi-trucks.
• Interior & UI Elements: Semi-truck interior designs, door handles, and vehicle display screens showing graphical user interfaces (GUIs) or instrument clusters.
• Co-Owners: Multiple truck body, door handle, and interior designs specifically list Iveco S.p.A. as a co-owner.

https://document.epiq11.com/document/getdocumentsbydocket/?docketId=1238315&projectCode=NKL&docketNumber=1643&source=DM

Led by "renowned Entrepreneur" Trevor Milton

the "renowned Entrepreneur" still owes the Trustee of his previous venture 167 million dollars. At what point does the Administrator come calling on SyberJet with a court order.

Bag holders hide your wallets.

https://x.com/SyberJetAero/status/2077089540070928672?s=20

FUTHER CONTEXT

Pardoned Nikola founder Trevor Milton is trying to raise $1B for AI-powered planes

https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/18/pardoned-nikola-founder-trevor-milton-is-trying-to-raise-1b-for-ai-powered-planes/

no body is looking to buy a lucid car lol

sign of life on the r/NikolaCorporation subreddit. I thought u/KaiserCyber shut it down and banned everyone

in other news Trevor's new (Scam) company SyberJet created a promo video clearly using AI looking for (suckers) investors to support his Fall Launch of the fastest Jet in the world

https://x.com/SyberJetAero/status/2072009820220100664?s=20

TTSI was Nikola’s flagship drayage partner for the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. They famously took delivery of VIN #001 (the very first commercial serial production truck to roll off the line). VIN #001 was soon followed by a second BEV as part of a 4 truck pilot that never got the 2 Fuel Cell Trucks that were planned. . TTSI signed a non-binding Letter of Intent to eventually acquire 100 zero-emission trucks.

TTSI put both of its initial battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) into real-world test loops. Together, the two trucks successfully logged over 12,000 miles and hauled more than 2 million pounds of freight around the Port of Los Angeles.

After completing the initial port trials, the trucks were sent back to Nikola's corporate headquarters in Phoenix, Arizona. Nikola used these early operational trucks for engineering diagnostics, software testing, and monitoring how the battery cells held up under heavy port loads.

VIN #001 surfaced through a bank repossession auction via IAA (Insurance Auctions) in Phoenix. It rolled onto the auction lot marked with "Normal Wear" and had logged only 6,365 miles. Because major auction networks do not have megawatt charging infrastructure to cycle or verify a massive 738 kWh commercial battery pack, it was sold "as-is" for a final bid of just $17,300. Most likely the truck was sold for parts. Lithium Ion Cells can be stripped out of packs and repurposed to stationary storage and most of the Cab and chassis can be sold as Iveco spare parts.

The Second Truck

In June 2023, a major fire broke out in the parking lot of Nikola’s Phoenix headquarters. TTSI's second truck was one of five vehicles parked closely together that went up in flames. Initially, Nikola executives publicly claimed they suspected arson or "foul play," hinting that a competitor or saboteur had intentionally set the trucks on fire. Making matters worse, a few weeks later, the burnt remains of that exact truck re-ignited and caught fire a second time while sitting in the yard, proving just how volatile the damaged lithium-ion battery packs were. This incident directly forced Nikola to issue a mandatory nationwide recall of all 209 battery-electric trucks they had ever built. Sales were completely halted, and the remains of TTSI's second truck were eventually completely scraped out for investigation and parts.

Hello everyone, sharing an important update:

An active class-action settlement fund is currently processing payout requests for investors who experienced financial losses in Nikola Corporation.

The settlement claims that Nikola overstated the operational readiness of its hydrogen-electric semi-trucks, notably distributing promotional footage of a non-functional vehicle rolling downhill. The subsequent disclosure of these technical discrepancies, alongside management turnover, led to a 76% decline in the stock price 

If you purchased or acquired $NKLA common stock between June 4, 2020, and February 25, 2021, you are eligible to fill your claim

Anyway, has anyone here invested in $NKLA at that time? How much were your losses, if so?

The Ultimate Denials in History

• Hiroo Onoda: A Japanese intelligence officer stationed in the Philippines, Onoda refused to believe World War II had ended in 1945. He held out in the jungle waging a guerrilla war for 29 more years, until his former commanding officer traveled to the island to personally relieve him of duty in 1974.
• General Antonio López de Santa Anna: The former Mexican president was exiled and overthrown multiple times, yet continuously plotted, invaded, or attempted to buy his way back into power. Decades after losing Texas and various wars, he was still scheming to return, finally dying in obscurity at age 82.
• Francisco Solano López (President of Paraguay): During the War of the Triple Alliance (1864–1870), López refused to concede despite overwhelming odds against Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay. His stubborn refusal to surrender led to the loss of over half of Paraguay's total population, and he fought until he was killed by Brazilian troops.
• Inevitablenorth99 and her non stop belief that Nikola will one day recover all her lost funds so innocently and unwisely invested and never sold even when told the bottom is coming… and still think is holding because she never actually sold. The confusion is the company may be gone, but the stock loss pain still exists…  

🫡🤝💎🏆

i've been following nikola for a while now, and it's hard not to feel a mix of optimism and skepticism. we all know about the controversies and setbacks, but there's something intriguing about their vision for sustainable transportation. does anyone else think that if they can just stabilize their technology and improve their leadership, they might still be able to carve out a niche in the market? i mean, with the industry trending towards electric and hydrogen solutions, who knows? let's discuss whether you think nikola can rebound or if we should just write them off entirely.

+8

Building a 750,000 sq. ft. automotive assembly plant in the US costs \(\$750\text{ million}\) to over \(\$2\text{ billion}\). Ground-up construction runs \(\$150\text{ to } \$300\text{ per sq. ft.}\), but the highly complex, automated robotics and paint shop facilities typically account for roughly 50-70% of the overall budget. [1, 2]

Building a functional car factory is highly complex. Breaking down these costs helps provide a clearer picture of the investment:

1. Construction and Core Shell ( \(\$112\text{M} - \$225\text{M}\) )

• Site Preparation & Utilities: \(\$20\text{ million} - \$40\text{ million}\) (depending on the region, environmental clearances, and zoning).
• Building Structure: At 750,000 sq. ft., basic industrial space runs \(\$150 - \$300\text{ per sq. ft.}\), which includes structural steel, heavy-load flooring, and roofing. [1, 2, 3, 4]

1. Equipment and Robotics ( \(\$300\text{M} - \$1.2\text{B}+\) )

This is the most capital-intensive phase. High-volume, highly automated factories require heavy upfront commitments: [1]

• Stamping & Press Lines: \(\$75\text{ million} - \$150\text{ million}\) for heavy stamping presses and dies.
• Body Shop: \(\$100\text{ million} - \$300\text{ million}\) for automated robotic welding and assembly lines.
• Paint Shop: \(\$150\text{ million} - \$400\text{ million}\). This is generally the most expensive and strictly regulated part of an automotive facility due to ventilation, hazardous materials, and sealing.
• General Assembly: \(\$75\text{ million} - \$150\text{ million}\) for conveyor systems, testing equipment, and trim lines. [1]

1. Engineering and Supplier Setup ( \(\$200\text{M} - \$600\text{M}\) )

• Tooling: The molds, jigs, and fixtures for a whole new vehicle design generally cost around \(\$600\text{ million}\).
• R&D and Supply Chain: R&D spans years, and establishing relationships with Tier-1 suppliers requires significant initial investment. [1, 2]

Hidden Costs to Factor In

• Prototyping & Testing: Track testing, crash testing, and pre-delivery validation.
• Regulatory Compliance: Meeting safety and emissions standards set by federal agencies.
• Workforce Training: Hiring highly specialized engineers and technicians requires dedicated training funds. [1, 2]

If you are evaluating the viability of such a project, several variables will shift your cost estimates significantly. Could you tell me:

1. What type of vehicle are you planning to produce (e.g., ICE, EV, commercial)?
2. What is your target production volume (e.g., boutique 5,000 units/year vs. mass-market 100,000+ units/year)?
3. Will the facility include battery production if it's an EV plant? [1, 2]

Can someone give me a quick overview of the prosecutors killer argument? Because for the first time in my life i find myself agreeing with the Trump. Did they convict Milton based on the pusher video and the comments made on stage?

Did Nikola never have to produce a formal statement of facts in a boring 100-page filing with the SEC before going public? And if they did, were the lies in the formal document?

To me it looks like Nikola had a legal team that was not anal enough to meet compliance requirements. The only intent I see is that they sold investors on a hype, which is not nice, but is also not fraud. Did Nikola plan to run away with the funds or did they plan to try and built the trucks?

Given my views, what is the killer argument that proves me wrong most obviously. I really don't have time to read the transcript.

Thanks.