Thursday, April 26, 2012 4:52:55 PM
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. BOOCK
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff,
v.
IRWIN BOOCK, STANTON B.J. DEFREITAS, NICOLETTE D. LOISEL, ROGER L. SHOSS and JASON C. WONG, Defendants, and
BIRTE BOOCK and 1621533 ONTARIO, INC., Relief Defendants.
No. 09 Civ. 8261 (DLC).
United States District Court, S.D. New York.
August 25, 2011.
If you look up the case online, Google "SEC v. Boock, Defreitas, Loisel, Shoss, and Wong," you will find Level Vision mentioned on the list of "Hijacked Companies."
If the stock was fraudulently issued, then would that not mean that "LVLV" stock is in fact worthless, regardless of whether or not Level Vision is currently a functioning company? Also, have any of the company officers ever commented on their stock or the above case?
It would seem quite absurd for Level Vision leadership to be unaware of the above case in which their company was involved. Why then would they tell investors that their stock may again become tradeable if the stock in question was issued fraudulently by an outside party?
Kona Gold Beverages, Inc. Announces Name Change to NuVibe, Inc. and Initiation of Ticker Symbol Application Process • KGKG • Apr 25, 2024 8:30 AM
Axis Technologies Group and Carbonis Forge Ahead with New Digital Carbon Credit Technology • AXTG • Apr 24, 2024 3:00 AM
North Bay Resources Announces Successful Equipment Test at Bishop Gold Mill, Inyo County, California • NBRI • Apr 23, 2024 9:41 AM
Epazz, Inc.: CryObo, Inc. solar Bitcoin operations will issue tokens • EPAZ • Apr 23, 2024 9:20 AM
Avant Technologies Launches Advanced AI Supercomputing Network and Expansive Data Solutions • AVAI • Apr 23, 2024 8:00 AM
BestGrowthStocks.com Issues Comprehensive Analysis of Triller Merger with AGBA Group Holding Limited • AGBA • Apr 22, 2024 1:00 PM