KOO - as I posted earlier, they have to rely on assurances from the purchaser and they have no definitively way of knowing there isn't something hidden within other entities. Any lawyer worth his weight would not advise them to make definitive statements that they have no way of being sure of. That is why they would have them place a bit of disclaimer. Hidden things surface every once in a while. Whether legal or not, RVX has to protect themselves and not state that nothing like this has occured. Should some share ownership within some hidden entity surface, RVX doesn't want to be held liable for stating that there is no such holding when they are relying on assurances from the purchaser that there isn't. That is why they say, "to their knowledge" and "not expected" rather than your definitive wording.