Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Specifically, the addition of the Hematocrit (HCT) adjustment feature will be used during each testing phase of the GenViro! test kit, to adjust for an abundance of or insufficiency of red blood cells in a patient sample. The addition of our TBG technology will yield three benefits: 1) the exclusion of the need for a chemical lysing solution and its intricacies, 2) mathematically correct for the hematocrit effect, where high and low HCT has the potential to interfere with electronic readings, and 3) further lower the time required for a completed Covid-19 test result by an anticipated 30%.
First, the quote posted you claim as part of false statements is accurate: the SEC website states it monitors trading activity which can be a basis for triggering a suspension.
Secondly, the issue of "kits" has been addressed. There are no kits until FDA gives EUA approval, boxes are printed along with instructions and product is packaged - that is the TEST KIT!
What the company is supposed to be testing is not the kits, but the test strips!
You made me smile as it now seems a reason to suspect fraud in a company is the fact that after it was suspended and demoted to Grey Markets, it is only trading a fraction of the shares it was trading before the suspension.
Who would expect otherwise?
Yes, report "possible" fraud where you have facts and evidence, not just suspicion based on emotions or other personal reasons as everywhere there is a human being there can be "possible" fraud. Don't waste the SEC's time and our tax money fishing for fraud please.
Waiting for the SEC to post company response or issue a statement/judgment if company did not file.
Outstanding shares issued now at 300M. Unrestricted shares at 294M which means 30M unrestricted shares issued very recently (over past month I believe in addition to the previous additions).
Would be nice to know to whom those were issued and at what price.
OTC Markets DECN
Any idea when that webpage was last updated?
Homepage "announcements" seems to be months old and career section seems like it might be dated as well.
Interesting that the Sales Rep ad on the website gives an international phone number to call.
So here we are 2 days away from the June 17th deadline for the SEC response to the DECN filing (June 3rd) if DECN made one and nothing posted to the SEC website. Since there isn't much purpose in filing a 550 Petition if you aren't interested in defending yourself, I would think DECN filed a response.
2 questions for anyone that knows:
1. If DECN did not file paperwork by June 3rd, will we see a posting on the SEC website ruling against DECN by default?
2. If DECN filed, but SEC is not posting it, how do we get a copy or get SEC to post it. I've called SEC and left msg, but without response.
Thanks
From the PR, it states DECN is working on a 2nd Amendment to the filing.
Anyone know what the 1st Amendment would have been?
Anyone have experience with what Amendments usually deal with or why they are filed?
PR disappoints in not addressing anything to do with testing that the last PR mentioned they would have and reveal by now. This PR is vague and while revealing negotiations for foreign distribution, mentions nothing of what those agreements might be dependent upon.
Between this and the fact the SEC hasn't posted the company's response of June 3rd, now over a week old (assuming it was filed and no real reason to think it wasn't), it really leaves shareholders without a clear knowledge of what the current situation is.
Was hoping for something more.
AIMO
Please provide link.
Really, trading today would seem to indicate otherwise, though I don't know what is triggering it.
I suggest all shareholders (and others are invited as well) call the SEC Office of the Secretary 202-551-5400 option 2 and leave a msg to request that if DECN has filed it's June 3 response to Administrative Proceedings No 3-19788, the filing be posted to the SEC.gov website where the previous filings through May 20th are posted so that all can read the company's response.
Good for everyone to know.
Have you contacted the SEC to see if DECN has filed their June 3rd response and will it be posted, or will we have to file a FOIA just to find out? (most likely months later)
Interesting. I wonder how they identified his IHUB account since there has been a claim here that IHUB would never release the identity of any account and reject a SEC subpoena?
But maybe they confiscated his computers? Wire tap?
Boy, a lot of IHUB MB posters could go down if the SEC had the personnel for P&D. Likely, another large Qty of IHUB MB posters could go down for knowingly posting negative or misleading info about a company, thereby putting false information out in the market to mislead investors.
Instead, here we are a week after the June 3rd filing deadline and there is nothing posted to the SEC website as regards the documents filed electronically by June 3, similar to the week or more we had to wait for the previous filings to appear, even though they are received in electronic form already.
Are you saying the SEC cannot and could not have taken further action against DECN and KB? You've stated in the past that the SEC has 5 years to file charges against the company.
If the SEC had concluded it was all a lie and had substantiated "proof" that this was all a scam, one would think the SEC would have filed further charges as you have stated that they have the power to do, no?
I'm glad you brought this up because it seems to be at the heart of the SEC filing:
Do you accept the SEC's representation that Berman "stated or suggested in interviews with staff" that as of April 13 he:
•knew that the company had no COVID-19 test kits;
•had not seen any of DECN’s prototype COVID-19 test kits;
•knew that the COVID-19 test kits would require component parts that were different from DECN’s current diabetes products, which the company did not yet have and would need before any sales could be made;
?
What would you consider "actual proof" that the company never had a working prototype?
as of April 13 he:
•knew that the company had no COVID-19 test kits;
•had not seen any of DECN’s prototype COVID-19 test kits;
•knew that the COVID-19 test kits would require component parts that were different from DECN’s current diabetes products, which the company did not yet have and would need before any sales could be made;
And if they have and the SEC doesn't post it, it wouldn't look any different either, just as it didn't appear the SEC had responded by the May 20th deadline when on May 25th there was nothing, not even DECN's amended May 15th 550 Petition.
I, for one, do not think DECN filed a 550 Petition and then would not use the opportunity to respond to the SEC documentation, which on face value, was not very strong or convincing. Maybe the SEC has a lot of hidden, solid information it is sitting on for some reason, but most of what they pointed out as false and misleading was neither based on the reasons they gave for it. As someone following the company since March and reading the PRs, neither "technology perfected" or Pre-EUA letter response made me think the product was going to market at that point. The PRs were consistent and steady in stating the process and needing EUA.
Now, I would be interested in actual proof that the company never had a working prototype, never tested the proto-type against COVID-19 blood samples in Daegu, etc. If those things are true, then there is no doubt KB misled the public and shareholders.
But to the extent 3rd party people make all sorts of claims and pump a stock as happens every day in the market, no, I don't see the SEC Suspension and filings as appropriate.
If DECN didn't respond by the deadline, how long before the SEC Commission posts a ruling in favor of the SEC Suspension (by default)?
And I suppose that is "proof" that DECN didn't file anything, right?
What a joke of an argument. So DECN now is supposed to be in control of when the SEC posts articles?
I and others were trying to contact the SEC when the May 20th filing by the SEC wasn't posted and it didn't appear for 6 days. When they posted the SEC's May 20th filing, they also posted DECN's May 15th amended filing, then 11 days after receipt.
I would like to see DECN's SEC response, so if you have connections with the SEC, please ask them to post it.
Gosh, I didn't realize Amazon.com therefore must be a scam as it lost money for years. Who would have thought it?
I wonder if we are ever going to see DECN's response to the SEC that was to be filed June 3rd. Still not posted to SEC website. Maybe DECN can post that as well.
Sorry, Rawman, but I wasn't responding to you, I was responding to a poster with a question of whether or not DECN has ever stated that it was developing an anti-body test and the headline is sufficient to state that.
Another thing you should be aware of is that a person doesn't just have anti-bodies when they've recovered, they develop anti-bodies to fight the virus, so the logic of KB's statement as I see it is simply, the virus test shows a positive result for the virus; if you want, you can then use the second test for anti-bodies as a confirmation that the person has the coronavirus antibodies in their system, thus "confirming" that the positive test result is valid.
Now, don't come back with all the statements of when and when not anti-bodies may be present. KB PRs are not meant as scientific conferences to cover all circumstances. It was a PR to explain the reasoning for the 2 different test kits.
Hmmm. Gee. I wonder why? Could it possibly be that because MB posters and others write to the SEC complaining that KB is trying to manipulate the stock price and the SEC files argumentation that their Trading Suspension Order is justified because DECN's stock price went up each time KB issued a PR?
No, that shouldn't have anything to do with it.
You can easily read all the company's PRs by going to www.otcmarkets.com, search for DECN and click on NEWS.
Take an hour and you can probably read through all the pertinent PRs released from March 3, 2020 to the present.
Read the following for your answer.
Company was developing 2 different types of kits with different test strips, the first for POC was to detect the presence of the virus and was not to be an anti-body test. The second type of kit was introduced as an "affirmation" kit, later a "confirmation" kit for at home use that would be an anti-body serology test kit.
March 23 PR
Serology Testing for COVID-19
According to the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, "Serology tests are blood-based tests that can be used to identify whether people have been exposed to a particular pathogen. Serology-based tests analyze the serum component of whole blood. The serum includes antibodies to specific components of pathogens, called antigens. These antigens are recognized by the immune system as foreign and are targeted by the immune response. These types of tests are often used in viral infections to see if the patient has an immune response to a pathogen of interest, such as influenza, or in this case COVID-19. These methodologies are a focus of current test kit methodologies, particularly what are called rapid kits, which are not very rapid, and not self-contained so therefore only a partial kit. These tests have been around at least since the 1980s. GenViro! is not a Serology methodology.
Mr. Berman concluded, "DECN is also creating what we call our affirmation test, a kit that will affirm a positive reading from the GenViro! Screener. Similar in nature to the GenViro! screener, and readable by the Avantage meter, the affirmation test will be serology based, but will use our unique and charmed electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. We anticipate being tens of millions of GenViro! kits down the road when our serology version of Genviro! is completed.
DECN to Add 2nd Covid-19 Test Kit Using Antibody/Antigen Methodology as a Determination Test for Patients Who Previously Tested Positive for Covid-19
COMPANY TO AGAIN SEEK FDA EUA FOR ITS CONFIRMATION KIT MAKING DECN THE FIRST TO OFFER TWO TYPES OF COVID-19 TEST KITS, A SCREENING KIT AND A POST SCREEN CONFIRMATION KIT
Most likely the delay in on the SEC side posting it. We had to wait 6 days to see the SEC filed docs.
Unless I am missing something, the 2 tests are very different (unless we now have 3 tests) as in previous PRs DECN made it clear that the POC test strips were going to test for the virus (virus antigen stated on radio interview) while the 2nd at home "confirmation" test kits were going to be anti-body tests to confirm whether or not a person has had the virus in the past.
So, unless the company now is pushing a POC antigen test strip and a similar at home antigen test kit as well as a third at home anti-body test, the POC and at home tests will use different test strips.
In light of today's PR, it is pretty clear testing has not been completed as KB states that he is waiting for more testing data in the next several days which he plans on posting.
So unless the test data is being physically mailed to him and that's why it will take several days, it's pretty clear ongoing testing is still taking place. What this testing is for, one or both test strips is not clear from the PR.
I wonder how many days we will have to wait for the SEC to post DECN's June 3 filing?
Lucky, are you contacting the SEC on this?
Unfortunately, this is old news. Radio interview from May 23rd.
Sad to read about "searching" for more website security as he hasn't even implemented a 2 hour free change to add a SSL certificate to Decision Diagnostic's website for the basic minimum protection. I see Pharma Tech website has https functionality at least, but why not both websites?
I would have to say, that in light of that, he has no clue and is not working with any competent website developer regarding website knowledge or security.
Plus, if you are going to make it available, it's going to be available to anyone and everyone. If the data is "proprietary", then redact or summarize the data in a way that you aren't revealing proprietary info.
Most likely, the next we hear from DECN is the filing of their response to the SEC filing of information the SEC had at the time of the trading suspension.
June 3rd is the due date for DECN to file a response up to 8,000 words. Don't know how long it will take the SEC to post it, but here is the link to look for it:
Admin Proceedings
On 5/26/20 there was no bid/ask price. On Grey Markets you cannot see a bid/ask price or quantity, only the price when the stock trades, so I'm not sure what you were seeing.
Some brokers still show a permanent bid of .215 and an ask of .395 from before it went to Greys.
Hope that helps.
Look, both the SEC and others writing to the SEC have made the claim that KB issues PRs only to mislead and pump up the stock price.
He goes a week or so without issuing a PR and now he's an irresponsible CEO not informing shareholders in a timely manner?
It's a no win situation. Most likely he is working on the response to the SEC filing, which is significant to the future reputation and trading availability of the stock to return to pink sheets etc.
Unfortunately, he is pretty much a one man show here in the US, so maybe cut him a little slack.
Pretty amazing how the price has held up in spite of SEC's public documentation. We are now over a month out from the Trading Suspension and a little less than that being on the Grey Sheets where all the negative claims were that it would be a race to sub-pennies, an amazing show imploding before our eyes.
And yet, we've had millions of shares bought at .15 and above over the past few days alone and I don't think the purchasing is from this MB.
Could be that others know something we don't know yet.
It's a shame that all that popcorn is getting stale.
Yeah, the SEC argument is pretty weak. Notice that they didn't claim he didn't have working test strips. In fact, other than repeating quotes or sections of DECN's PRs and listing them under a section of false or misleading information, the SEC filing didn't contain any positive proof to show them as false or misleading statements. They really didn't present any backup for their claims other than a few questions and summary answers from KB that are not conclusive or overwhelming as "evidence". Where's their documentation of proof in the filing?
Without the box printed and inside instructions printed and approved via the FDA, no test "kit" can exist. If KB would have said, "Yes, we have test kits", then they could have shut him down for lying.
So "test kits" will not be manufactured and assembled unless DECN gets FDA EUA or approval, simple as that.
The science and testing as of April 13th was all done by Musho and company in South Korea, so shouldn't be alarmed if KB didn't demand a Zoom conference call to be sure Musho wasn't pulling his leg,
Keep in mind, that The Bio is the company that has the registered devices with the FDA per other posters' links here on this MB. KB is the US contact rep. The Bio manufactures the devices, Musho and other scientists are the ones who have designed and tested the COVID-19 test strips to work with the existing Precise meter so that a new device would not need to be developed which KB early on in the PRs stated would cut months off the development timeframe.
Also, remember that KB in early PRs about entering the COVID-19 testing arena laid out a plan that would see manufacturing and sales by late summer 2020.
So we are still on a pretty early time frame, though I too would like to see FDA testing and results. As far as FDA review, they mentioned having one person assigned to the product and stated in PRs that they knew of 72 other companies ahead of them having applied for EUA. Who knows how many of the 72 have completed the review process? DECN may be waiting in line.
Well, if you've read the company's PRs and filings, you know that the Covid-19 test kits will use the GenUltimate Precise meter, which already exists. This was part of the design process, to choose a design that didn't need the development of a new meter.
The Covid test strips are what had to be designed to identify the virus, not the meter.
Not much to see from the test strip and from looking at them, you can't tell whether or not they would work.
Several of the SEC's arguments of "proof" of false or misleading quotes can be answered and contradicted by quotes from the very same series of PRs. Will compile a few later today.
But for those interested, SEC paragraph 16 states as evidence against the company that the image of the promotional picture of the COVID-19 test kit looks like the meter used for pets.
Well, that's because it will look like it. The company stated in a March 4 PR that they finalized their PRECISE meter in February and along with an adapter that can be used with the GenViro strips, it will eliminate the need to sanitize or sterilize the meter between test strip uses. It is the development of this meter that the company referred to several times would take months off the normal development cycle because the meter was already in place and the design/look of the meter for pets and GenUltimate are similar. The Image in the SEC filing from the company's PR is not deceptive.
Image
Also, the SEC filing claims the company mislead investors with PR about Pre-EUA filing and getting a number as being equal to having received FDA approval, yet even in the PRs right before suspension, the company clearly states that they are in the process of FDA EUA review. Sure, take a sentence or phrase out of context or only read a few words and anyone can be mislead or misinformed, but the company initially, throughout and just before suspension made it clear there were proceeding through the process of EUA review and hoped for/expected approval.
Certainly on the SEC's 2 points above, a "not guilty" ruling should be easy as there is ample evidence.
Oh, and the argument about GenViro being put forth as a "product" on the company's website? Go check, it hasn't changed. The SEC's reference to the home page of the website is not under products, it is under "UPDATES" and the GenViro image links to the powerpoint that talks about the development and not available for sale. Click on the company's website menu for "PRODUCTS" and you won't find GenViro listed. So, for this, you suspend a company?
Sounds like someone at the SEC needs to take some time to really investigate with an open mind. The SEC filing to me is the result of an overly aggressive and possibly premature decision to suspend the company, in part fueled by false information fed to the company from the outside and what they filed as evidence is anything they could find to support that decision in retrospect because the arguments about the product image and website don't hold water from a normal, neutral purview of the information.
When all the paperwork is in the SEC Commission makes a judgement to either uphold the Trading Suspension or dismisses the Trading Suspension which would allow broker-dealer to file 211 to FINRA for reinstatement of DECN to OTC pinks I believe.
There are no fines or further penalties if DECN loses the Petition associated with this decision.
I guess the SEC is always free to pursue other investigations or file other charges in the future.
One should never expect litigation to be "comforting" or for the opposition to make your own case.
What the SEC filing is supposed to reveal is their main reasons and evidence for the need to have taken action to suspend trading in a company's stock and thereby, knowingly cripple or damage it by their actions. The "damage" being warranted when an attempt to stop clear fraud.
I've read a lot of PRs and been damaged by false claims of a lot of "reporting" companies. I was surprised that the SEC just states as fact that what the company has claimed in its PRs is false or misleading without having much information, or at least not providing much information in their filing of any proof other than KB's own answers to questions that multiple people have exposed as not being conclusive in supporting the SEC's premise of fraud, that's all.
One part of the website said all products were "cleared". Supposedly, it is an irreversible crime to not have updated every section and in KB's mind, he wasn't selling the product yet, so from a certain perspective, all products he was selling have been "cleared" as stated. The PP stated not yet approved, but instead of a simple warning to update the website, the SEC suspends trading. Interesting to see if the action/penalty is warranted by the "offense".
If the SEC has heavy proof and evidence beyond what they have revealed, what was it not included. Otherwise, we are in a shoot first and ask questions later mode vis-a-vis the current situation just because DECN has been working on a COVID-19 related product.
While the SEC filing is not comforting, it certainly isn't the lock down type of damning evidence and proof one would think is warranted.
However, the SEC creates as their fourth main category of argument:
9IV.Recent Surge in DECN’s Share Price and Trading Volume
Actually, I was expecting something much stronger from the SEC filing. SEC document doesn't even accuse KB or the company of illegal insider trading or stock manipulation. It infers that the stock price went up because of the PRs. Okay, but who was trading the 100M shares? How many other websites, DT with followers were the ones pushing up the price? If there is a crime, go there.
Had to smile when they claim that investors were misled by KB stating that DECN received Pre-EUA number for its submission. What? Are you kidding. PRs continued to clearly say product in development and had to go through rigorous testing, but the SEC feels someone would misinterpret that as reason enough to Suspend Trading? hmmm not too strong of an argument, reaching in my opinion.
Most damaging statements in SEC filing are claims of past history of KB making exaggerated or false statements.
But even the segment that they put front and center needs to be read twice and is not necessarily a convincing blow:
Berman, who alone drafted the press releases on behalf of DECN, stated or suggested in interviews with staff that he:
•knew that the company had no COVID-19 test kits;
•had not seen any of DECN’s prototype COVID-19 test kits;
•had no idea how many test kits DECN could produce;
•knew that the COVID-19 test kits would require component parts that were different from DECN’s current diabetes products, which the company did not yet have and would need before any sales could be made;