Plastic2Oil Inc (PTOI)

[fourkids_9pets]

what is laughable is the Sec in relation to their use of Obey-the-Law” Injunctions

quite clear to most who did the DD >> what *transpired* (to say nothing of when)
and why certain Sec employees were *sucked* into the PTOI *orchestration* rather early
in the *game* (2010) which of course via discovery would prove problematic
to the larger effort underway re: targeting PTOI >> since 2009

it's always about the cycle of money in play which covers both sides of the coin >> UP and DOWN

interesting to note what happened in RT (real time) in 2012 and why some of us advocated
(even tho' settlement is usually preferred due to atty costs ratcheting ever upwards)
that *prior* P2O mgmt fight this bullsh*t

>> why do i suspect that certain dirty whales aka aromatics >> had a hand in forcing this settlement
decision .. so their *set up* of PTOI could continue on unchecked >> (reminder *threshold on PTOI
triggered for a 2nd round in June 2012) .. of course we all know the money man Sam May *sold*
some PTOI shares @ approx 77c .. mere days b4 the dolts *settlement* finally revealed itself .. snicker .. in Jan 2013 .. ;)

note to self: >> 1.2012 >> 5.2012 >> 1.2013 .. to add to those other notable dates (including July and Sept 2010)

but i digress ..


from 2012 an article on *obey the law injunctions* in relation to the dolts ..

December 4, 2012
Chinks in the Enforcement Armor: Recent Decisions Erode SEC's Favored Remedies

The Securities and Exchange Commission's Division of Enforcement has been aggressively pursuing investigations and bringing charges in the last several years. Public companies and their officers and directors under investigation often find themselves in situations where there is no “ill-gotten gain” to be disgorged, turning the focus to injunctive relief, officer and director bar orders, and civil penalties. The impact of these remedies alone can be significant.

During the past six months, however, several courts have rejected these cornerstones of the SEC's enforcement arsenal in situations that may provide leverage to companies and their directors and officers looking to exit an investigation or enforcement action on favorable terms. This article will analyze the impact of three of these decisions on defense and settlement strategies.

http://www.bna.com/chinks-in-the-enforcement-armor-recent-decisions-erode-secs-favored-remedies/


======

another in the same vein .. also from 2012

SEC “Obey-the-Law” Injunctions Held Invalid
Posted by Noam Noked, co-editor, HLS Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation, on Monday July 23, 2012 at 9:29 am

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a blow to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and its long-standing practice of seeking broad federal court injunction orders directing defendants to refrain from any future violations of securities laws, often referred to as “obey-the-law” injunctions. In SEC v. Goble, No. 11-12059, 2012 WL 1918819 (11th Cir. May 29, 2012), the Eleventh Circuit vacated the “obey-the-law” injunctions entered against defendant Richard Goble, the founder of North American Clearing, Inc. (“North American”), because the injunctions did not satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d)(1), which requires that injunctions describe, “in reasonable detail. . . the act or acts [sought to be] restrained or required.” Although the decision appears to widen an existing gap between the Eleventh and Second Circuits on the propriety of “obey-the-law” injunctions in SEC settlements, the full impact of the Goble decision remains unclear. The Eleventh Circuit’s strongly worded opinion and careful analysis could prompt other courts to question the benefit and efficacy of the SEC’s frequent practice of seeking such broad “obey-the-law” injunctions.

http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/2012/07/23/sec-obey-the-law-injunctions-held-invalid/

which pet project was in charge in 2012? .. rhetorical


slightly more current but no less vomit inducing is this little ditty

United States: Are SEC Obey-The-Law Injunctions Changing?
Last Updated: November 12 2013
Article by Ernest E. Badway
Fox Rothschild LLP


There is an ongoing effort at the SEC to review its injunctions, and if they should be tailored more closely to the misconduct at issue.

The Enforcement Division is becoming more creative about injunctive relief, and it is trying to tailor their injunctions in a way that makes them more meaningful and effective. The injunctive relief sought by the SEC, typically, bars defendants from future violations of securities law provisions. These broad injunctions are, essentially, meaningless and do little to deter repeat offenders according to some. The SEC may obtain contempt orders for defendants, who violate the injunctions only in cases of ongoing conduct. However, repeat violators often engage in new violations, making a contempt order not possible.

The SEC's new approach in attempting to tailor its injunctive relief could also find support with United States district court judges. Some judges have been unwilling to approve the SEC's consent decrees because they, in part, want to see more remedial actions.

This could be the beginning of the end of this outdated practice. However, let's wait and see.


http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/274378/Securities/Are+SEC+ObeyTheLaw+Injunctions+Changing

yep let's wait and see what the dolts have on offer next .. unless it is totally disbanding
it won't be worth the paper it's written on :)

btw .. anyone wanting to actually read up on this topic .. activate those favored search engines

'da google came up with


About 317,000 results (0.40 seconds) for >> SEC's Use of Obey-the-Law Injunctions

4kids
all jmo