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.
How does SEC revoke a security which has been current for 3+ years? Show me proof we've showed you a few securities where SEC remanded case to judge to reconsider her decision since company became current. NO CHANCE OF REVOCATION
JMO I feel like these new rules are useless look at AMC FTD no covering yet like how long before the covering SEC is a joke. Looking forward to pink
Yes agree! SEC is a joke
#CEtoPINKtoDBOOM!!! LOVE IT!
Yep! 100% agree no chance of revocation
Do you know where I can find information regarding this case on the SEC website trying to compare with our $DBMM case :) thanks
Btw your post this morning was excellent:)
I THINK we'll have an answer from the SEC in August I found a pattern from 2020. check out these companies SEC reviewed in Jan and again in August so sad we have to do this
Jan. 29, 2020Rolling Pin Kitchen Emporium, Inc. and Speed of Thought, Inc. (Order to Show Cause)
Aug. 19, 2020Rolling Pin Kitchen Emporium, Inc. and Speed of Thought, Inc. (Opinion of the Commission)
Jan. 24, 2020Consolidated Arbitration Applications (Order Severing Proceedings)34-89495
Aug. 6, 2020The Consolidated Arbitration Applications for Review of Action Taken By FINRA (Order Finding Jurisdiction)
Jan. 29, 2020Ceetop Inc. n/k/a S.Q. Hydrogen Power, Inc., China Internet Café Holdings Group, Inc. and Starlight Supply Chain Management Company (Order to Show Cause)
Aug. 20, 2020Ceetop Inc. n/k/a S.Q. Hydrogen Power, Inc., China Internet Café Holdings Group, Inc. and Starlight Supply Chain Management Company (Opinion of the Commission)34-88087
Jan. 29, 2020Sweetwater Investing, Inc. and Thunor International, Inc. (Order to Show Cause)34-89628
Aug. 20, 2020Sweetwater Investing, Inc. and Thunor International, Inc. (Opinion of the Commission)34-88086
Jan. 29, 2020BCI Holding Inc., Bulova Technologies Group, Inc. and Omni Bio Pharmaceutical, Inc. (Order to Show Cause)34-89606
Aug. 18, 2020BCI Holding Inc., Bulova Technologies Group, Inc. and Omni Bio Pharmaceutical, Inc. (Opinion of the Commission)
Sooo punish a company sooo harshly by revoking them even if they became current and continue to keep filing but, let Kurt Kramer go with a fine and he keeps coming back that's okay right ? Other companies who have scammed investors SEC clears with a fine but punish $DBMM soo harshly for something minor yeah not gonna happen buddy
Again how is it $DBMMs fault when the judge didn't see that a sanction fit this case? Both sanctions presented to her made absolutely no sense. Also how can $DBMM decide a sanction for themselves? She is a judge with 25 years of experience let's not disrespect her if SEC wants to sanction they'll remand case to judge Foelak and she'll say the same thing this proceeding IS DISMISSED now even with 2 more years of current filings YES GOOO $DBMM if anything Samantha should be fired.
Soo if SEC suspends $DBMM we don't have to file quarterly filings soo that would make no sense as this whole case was based of delinquency per SEC even though it all started from them disqualifying our auditor.
Revocation - we've been current for 3 years now so how can you revoke a company that's current with filings?
They could possibly suspend for 10 days since suspensions are 12 months of less so $DBMM can continue filings
Look SEC is not as harsh as you or DOE. Fine maybe SEC might have $DBMM refile the re-audits again as part of their sanction who knows. BUT REVOCATION IS OUT OF THE QUESTION for sure.
That was from Judge Patil in 2017 $DBMM needed time to re-audit filings which was completed in 2018. If Judge Patil was handling this case today he would've also dismissed case.
Find me a stock where the SEC revoked the security even when the company filed all past reports became current and continue to file oh and company has to have an adequate explanation for the delinquency.
$DBMM referring to the gateway factors
Our auditor was disqualified by SEC. - (persuasive explanation) gateway factor 1 and 3 checked this was outside the company's control
Current for the past 3 years gateway factor 5 checked.
Re-audited filings for past 3 years due to disqualification of our auditor gateway factor 4 checked
Oh and those little deficiencies of quarterly reports not being included in the consolidated 10k that we keep bringing up is minor what we filed was sufficient enough to become current per Corp-Fin. THAT DOES NOT SUPPORT REVOCATION. That decision has been consistent with other cases
we provided a link to E-Smart where SEC sent the case back to the judge to reconsider and dismiss the case.
No chance of revocation period WE WIN!
You want proof of naked shorts here you go
Busted!
CNBC mentions naked shorts tonight.
@TradesTrey @AMCTheatres $amc #AMCSqueeze #amcstock #AMCARMY #AMC500k #amc she’s getting in trouble pic.twitter.com/jIgGwuRh9G
— SatHeadz🟧🦋 (@SatHeadz) June 4, 2021
Good to see you here Jimmy Joe! Let's make some money gooooo $AMC
Hiiiiii awww thank you sir :)
Commissioners will NOT go against a judges ID. This is copied right from E-Smart technology where the judge revoked E-smart but then they became current sooo SEC commissioners sent case back to judge for reconsider her decision.
Under the circumstances, therefore, we believe it is appropriate to provide the law judge an opportunity to assess her sanctioning .determination in light of e-Smart's subsequent reporting18 record.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that this proceeding be, and it hereby is, remanded to the administrative law judge for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.19 The law judge is ordered to file the decision on remand
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/opinions/34-50514.htm
Asher sued $DBMM because of the delinquency which was caused by the SEC. So it is the SEC's fault.
Also the deficiencies in our filings do not warrant revocation per ALJ Carol Foelak that would provide limited benefits to investors but doesn't call for revocation its sufficient enough to become current per Corp Fin
If Corp Fin had any issues they would've issues a comment letter. They did not instead DOE used someone else to use against us in the case. If anything Shame on DOE for wanting to punish a company so harshly.
Why would there be a sanction when the reason for delinquency started from the SEC disqualifying our auditor? $DBMM was compliant before the disqualification of our auditor we complied and re-auditied filings which kind of held us back from keeping up with current filings. Asking to re-audit 3 years of filing for any small reporting company is financially impossible lot of money involved however $DBMM got it done. We re-auditied filings became current and continue to file on time.
Yep! Checking SEC website daily anyday now
Point is they became current and did not get revoked if they violated something else that's on them. Just to prove if $DBMM is doing what PHLO did to become current SEC will dismiss proceeding.
PHLO was NOT revoked! this is the correct SEC case.
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/opinions/2007/34-55562.pdf
case number copied right from our brief same case number Frtiz used in our brief matches the one SEC DID NOT REVOKE! Link above. Phlo Corp, Exchange Act Release No. 55562, 2007 WL 137145 (Jan. 21, 2009) .NO.55562
However, Phlo has now devoted significant resources to satisfying its reporting obligations and has become current with87/ We deny Phlo's motion to strike the portion of Enforcement's brief urging revocation. Ina previous order, we determined to review sanctions in this proceeding on our own initiative pursuant to Rule of Practice 411(c), 17 C.F.R. § 201.411(c). Order GrantingPetition for Review (Mar. 17, 2006). Thus, Enforcement's briefing of this issue was notimproper.88/ 15 U.S.C. § 78l(j).89/ Gateway Int'l Holdings, Inc., 88 SEC Docket at 438-39.90/ Id. at 439. 28respect to its periodic filing obligations. Moreover, Phlo has retained a consultant recommended by its current auditor to improve its internal accounting function. We have imposed a cease-anddesist order against future violations. Thus, we decline to revoke the registration of Phlo'scommon stock. 91
I've looked at other cases from when SEC ask for a briefing schedule. They do this to all companies they're irreplaceable with a secured job they can take as long as they want. Wasting tax payer dollars.
Example on July 2nd 2019 - Saving to retire petition for review scheduling briefs
October 16th 2020 - order extending time to issue decision
April 2021- order extending time again
July 2nd 2019- James Winkelman - petition for review scheduling briefs.
November 13th 2020- order extending time to issue decision
2021- nothing yet
These are different cases not Section (j) 12 so these are examples of other companies waiting shame on you SEC.
Excited for us. We'll another year and half who cares all we care about is PINK! I honestly think we'll hear something by Sept.
We're going PINK! Enjoy your holiday weekend
The commissioners can remand the judge who issued the ID and order that she reconsider reexamine whether to ratify or revise all prior actions in this proceeding and she'll see $DBMM filed for all of 2020 and continue to file for 2021. Yeah my ID stands as is case dismissed. Stop wasting tax payers dollars go after the big fish those who are naked shorting companies.
Look at Phlo Corp and E-smart 2009 and 2004 sec commissioners declined to revoke same situation as DBMM so no $DBMM is not the only case there have been others that were delinquent in filings become current and had persuasive explanations so SEC did not revoke registration. The delinquency started from SEC disqualifying our auditor. We complied and re-audit filings as asked. Linda made a promise to the courts and got it done. The law is not as harsh as DOE is no chance of revocation. Also the missing quarterly reports from past years do not benefit investors. What DBMM did was enough to become current per Divison Corp manual.
No chance of revocation. That's all that matters :)
Hahaha exactly me too right. 28/7 lolol love it $DBMM!!!!!
Love it attention even on a holiday weekend I just love $DBMM Johny!
Yesss it's a Winner! Plus long term capital gains for me so I'm totally okay waiting until even next year ;)
Did you know we're the last open case from 2017 for delinquent filings? Every other case as cleared. So right what's the hold back
SEC working hard this week on "new cases" only because Monday's a holiday. Watch next week/month they'll take it easy worked way too hard this week.
here are links busy day at work!
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/apdocuments/3-17990-2021-03-26-respondent-appellees-brief.pdf ;
Page 4 . disqualification of Auditor by SEC
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/apdocuments/3-17990-event-11.pdf
page 2. Asher Enterprises, Inc. then recommended RBSM, LLP as the new auditorpage 3. When RBSM did notfinish the audits, DBMM submitted their answer and counterclaims against AsherEnterprises, Inc., which included counterclaims that Asher Enterprises, Inc. had-:unauthorized communications with the DBM M's certifying accountant
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/apdocuments/3-17990-2021-03-26-respondent-appellees-brief.pdf
page 20. Division of Corporate Finance Financial Reporting Manual at §1320.4. SeeCan-Cal, Release No. 6525 at 9 and n. 48 (where DOE argued that issuer was still delinquent, afterfiling of comprehensive Form 10-k, in relation to its quarterly filings, held that “the filing of a 10-K containing the material information that would have been in the 10-Qs does not absolve theregistrant of liability but is sufficient for the purposes of becoming current”).
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/apdocuments/3-17990-2021-03-26-respondent-appellees-brief.pdf
page 15.
e-Smart Technologies,Release No. 50514 2004 WL 2309336 (Oct. 12, 2004), in which the Commission declined torevoke the company’s securities. In Phlo, “the issuer – unlike Absolute – pointed to specificinternal accounting failures that led to its violations.” Further, “the Company made extensive andsuccessful efforts to remedy the internal accounting failures that led to its violations, becamecurrent in its reporting obligations while the disciplinary proceeding was pending, and expendedsignificant resources in so doing.” Id. The circumstances of e-Smart, the Commission in AbsolutePotential continued, were also distinguishable: there, management had retained new counsel,explained the filing delinquencies and was able to bring and keep the Company current.
The 10-Q gets filed on July 14th!
Definitely verifiable I'll send links to all events from SEC proceeding page tomorrow
Every business makes mistakes and fails but they learn from their mistakes and correct their mistakes. Which Linda is doing
Sure does lots of good information From 2017 to present we have a very strong case.
100% agree with you. I'm excited for what's to come
Well you should read all the court documents. On the SEC website