Yes, unfortunately they did. I was more interested in the assertions of both companies:

BMRX asserts that the transaction between the two parties was void because the financial arrangements were criminally usurious

and regarding Alternative Construction Tech: The Company seeks a declaratory judgment against the Investors for alleged breach of contract and breach of fiduciary responsibilities by committing violations of the Federal Securities Act of 1933 and 1934 as amended, predatory investment banking practices, illegal trading activity, lender liability, negligence of the Entire Fairness Standard and committing several other malicious and tortuous actions............and attempted undue influence of its board members to take certain actions in order for the Investors to gain control over the Company.