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.
The shareholders hope here is hinged not on the canal (the canal will be build), but on resurection of their ACDU. The primary issue is if the ACDU is dead or just strategically hibernating and will return to life as their company upon awakening.
ABAT resurrected but is still in a hospital. See YAHOO mb.
http://finance.yahoo.com/mb/forumview/?&v=m&bn=bfa6494d-f152-3763-97df-554ebc935e79
<<This stock showed promise now I see it was only a scam>>
This stock is showing that it is delisted and, thus, not existing.
Just spoke to my broker about this, and he said, "Ja.. ja.. ja.. that might happen."
Consider also that some "envierologists" just do not like this canal because it sound too good to allow its peaceful construction. If to turn all this monkey business pink,let's do this, but enough all this t sick procrastination. it is not about patience, but about dishonest
Folks, please comment seriously. This is extremely serious stuff.
A delisted stock, especially of a Chinese company, is practically nonexistent stock. So, why you, folks believe that you owe ACDU???
The owners of the nonexistent, delisted company can offer to buy us out... for a sweet smile ... and we even could sue, but suing instead of a bunch of gypsies makes a far better sense than suing Chinese... and for what??? And this is while the owner is still in business.
Such sordid Chinese attitude is state sponsored... meaning a lot of wasted time and money and ZERO outcome, regardless of any judgment.
It is a big fun to read about such stuff. Try. Google this.
They should be sued here...
Some people are talking about shareholders buyout, others that Chinese would just laugh at this. We need to speak to lawyers.
REAL DUTCH
Some time ago, you posted about an intent to sue ABAT. What do you think about this now? Do you know anybody who are eager to do that? do you have any atty in mind?
In regard to the SEC notices, nobody served them on the shareholders.
A friend called me, an elderly experienced investor. He said that this is not any "clerical error", but intentional destruction of the stock, the shoring mob final move, and that we immediately need a good attorney. He does nor believe in any shareholders buyout perspective here.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS RULINGS
Release No. 3225/October 14, 2015
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
File No. 3-16832
In the Matter of
:
ADVANCED BATTERY TECHNOLOGIES, INC., :
CHAUVIN ENTERPRISES, INC., : ORDER
(a/k/a INTERNET SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS, INC., a/k/a :
INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS, INC.), and :
OILSANDS QUEST, INC., :
The Securities and Exchange Commission instituted this proceeding with an Order
Instituting Proceedings (OIP), pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Exchange Act), on September 25, 2015, and the hearing was scheduled to commence on October
19, 2015. The OIP alleges that each Respondent is a corporation with a class of securities
registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act and has
repeatedly failed to file required periodic reports. The Division of Enforcement is seeking to
revoke the registration of Respondents’ securities.
The OIP provides that each Respondent’s Answer is due within ten days of service of the
OIP on it. See OIP at 3; 17 C.F.R. § 201.220(b). A Respondent that fails to file an Answer
within the time provided will be deemed to be in default, and the undersigned will enter an order
revoking the registration of its securities. See OIP at 3; 17 C.F.R. §§ 201.155(a), .220(f). To
allow time for Answers, the hearing will be postponed sine die, and a prehearing conference will
be held by telephone on January 15, 2016, at 10:00 a.m. EST, if the proceeding has not been
resolved by then.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/S/ Carol Fox Foelak
Carol Fox Foelak
Administrative Law Judge
The delisting proceeding was initiating here on Sept 25, 2015. Prior to Oct 14, the ABAT's auditor had obviously a very serious and decent communication with the judge, for she ordered the extensions of the proceeding, if needed, sine die: without assigning a day for further meeting or hearing, setting tentatively next meeting on January 15, 2016.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS RULINGS
Release No. 3177/September 30, 2015
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
File No. 3-16832
In the Matter of
ADVANCED BATTERY TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
CHAUVIN ENTERPRISE, INC.
(A/K/A INTERNET SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS, INC.,
A/K/A INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS,
INC.), AND OILSANDS QUEST INC.
ORDER SCHEDULING
HEARING AND
DESIGNATING
PRESIDING JUDGE
The Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) has ordered, pursuant to
Rule 360(a)(2) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, that the Administrative Law Judge
assigned to this proceeding shall issue an initial decision no later than 120 days from
service of the Order Instituting Proceedings. See 17 C.F.R. § 201.360(a)(2).
IT IS ORDERED that the hearing in this matter commence at 9:30 a.m., Monday,
October 19, 2015, in the Commission Headquarters Offices, Hearing Room 2, 100 F
Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Administrative Law Judge Carol Fox Foelak
preside at the hearing in these proceedings and perform other and related duties in
accordance with the Commission’s Rules of Practice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties confer and notify the presiding
judge of a suggested date and time for a prehearing conference which will be conducted
telephonically unless the parties prefer otherwise.
Service of all orders and rulings on parties is made by the Commission’s Office of
the Secretary, or other duly authorized Commission officer, pursuant to Commission
Rule of Practice 141, 17 C.F.R. § 201.141. All issuances by Administrative Law Judges
are posted on the Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov/alj.
For the Commission, by its Chief Administrative Law Judge, pursuant to
delegated authority.
_______________________________
Brenda P. Murray
Chief Administrative Law Judge
This is a clerical error of course, but it is operative, and ABAT will remain delisted until an appropriate judicial action (like removing the stray order from the record). Paritz & Company, our auditors , if we still have them, must take care of this. Email them. See my previous posts.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS RULINGS
Release No. 3225/October 14, 2015
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
File No. 3-16832
In the Matter of
:
ADVANCED BATTERY TECHNOLOGIES, INC., :
CHAUVIN ENTERPRISES, INC., : ORDER
(a/k/a INTERNET SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS, INC., a/k/a :
INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS, INC.), and :
OILSANDS QUEST, INC., :
The Securities and Exchange Commission instituted this proceeding with an Order
Instituting Proceedings (OIP), pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Exchange Act), on September 25, 2015, and the hearing was scheduled to commence on October
19, 2015. The OIP alleges that each Respondent is a corporation with a class of securities
registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act and has
repeatedly failed to file required periodic reports. The Division of Enforcement is seeking to
revoke the registration of Respondents’ securities.
The OIP provides that each Respondent’s Answer is due within ten days of service of the
OIP on it. See OIP at 3; 17 C.F.R. § 201.220(b). A Respondent that fails to file an Answer
within the time provided will be deemed to be in default, and the undersigned will enter an order
revoking the registration of its securities. See OIP at 3; 17 C.F.R. §§ 201.155(a), .220(f). To
allow time for Answers, the hearing will be postponed sine die, and a prehearing conference will
be held by telephone on January 15, 2016, at 10:00 a.m. EST, if the proceeding has not been
resolved by then.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/S/ Carol Fox Foelak
Carol Fox Foelak
Administrative Law Judge
At least we have the best justice and happy new years.
Google Paritz & Co and email them. If they are still representing ABAT in SEC, then everything is fine. But pls do not abuse them. Myself, I did not call them. I am confident in ABAT.
Zeusgreek7777
ABAT is still trading, it is still operative, but all this is on SEC mercy. Because of the predatory suit with shorts, in 9-2011, ABAT was delisted from NAZDAQ. We were fantasizing that it would go private or lists with a Chinese exchange, but it was in claws of mob, "justice", some SEC-Chinese incongruities. Only in Febr. 2015 these incongruities were softened up, and ABAT started to work on its fin files.
We are talking here actually only about one year of filing procrastination. But about four years of the company and its shareholders terrible ordeal, horrible losses. ABAT never betrayed us during this vile time. And why would it betray us now!
And the SEC -- it may not take such stuff, as any delisting, lightly, but must act reasonably. And this is how it acts.
Russia is ready to join the grand-canal construction and provide all necessary security.... and appears unhappy with the procrastination. But once again: calmer you go further you would be. Ancient Russian proverb.
http://sputniknews.com/latam/20151026/1029105985/russia-nicaragua-canal.html
<<About a year ago, they retained an auditor who is still working.>>
And by the way, this was the time when the SEC-China filing conflict smoothed up.
So, the ABAT auditors are obviously PARITZ @ CO, representing ABAT in SEC and auditing 5 years fin record. In such situations, SEC always would extend time (as needed) rather than delete the company.
A year old article:
http://www.microcapdaily.com/a-look-at-advanced-battery-technologies-inc-otcmktsabat/16798/
My take on this:
About a year ago, they retained an auditor who is still working. The delay is not necessarily too big because the delinquent work is enormous.
In March-April 2o11, hit by shorts, the CEO became ill. He endured a lot while being awfully busy with the new factory, etc. And now, after all the hardship and victories, he and his son would just give up?
The SEC has to enforce its regulations and not to maliciously sabotage anything, and this is what it is doing. It is cooperating. There is no any malice in its orders.
Some shareholders had tried to come with a new suit... with a sick name calling, etc. The surest way to kill all communication with the company. Fools are always more dangerous than enemies. Ancient truism.
Hadn't you posted that ABAT got an auditor who is working with SEC? What does that mean?
Then the SEC had modified its categorical rulings. Under the circumstances, this could be only upon some auditor-judge communication.
Soon, by 1-15-16, we will find out more....
Greg:
When it will resolve its filing problems with SEC, it will jump very high, and it is supposed to do this prior to Jan 15.... within a month....
The filing problems, the Chinese-SEC filing incongruities were actually softened up a year ago with big four auditors paying a million dollar fine for evading US law, and the situation is no longer war like. The auditors and firms are working with the records and SEC is cooperating. And it is inconceivable that ABAT would betray and rob the shareholders.... They are just very, very busily toiling.
All the remaining shorts had vanished from the Yahoo ABAT board it seems. They should, for the time for ABAT to explode is around the corner.
"The permanent trade halt" is the very max shorts' gain.
<<But the SEC does place permanent trade halts on stocks that cease reporting. The majority of the China stocks like ABAT have been halted already.>>
All this is encouraging, however sad. It looks the ABAT's and the fallen "majority's" spilled blood, and the big fourth's fight were not wholly in vain.
Yesterday, SEC purged its ABAT file leaving only two original ruling initiating ABAT DELLETION. E.g. an ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE.
This means that the removed rulings were tentative, that something else of a serious merit is holding the SEC's hand.
Interesting also that this coincides with the removal of the "bloody Mary", the supposed mobster.
So, let's wait for Jan 15, 2016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS RULINGS
Release No. 3225/October 14, 2015
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
File No. 3-16832
In the Matter of
:
ADVANCED BATTERY TECHNOLOGIES, INC., :
CHAUVIN ENTERPRISES, INC., : ORDER
(a/k/a INTERNET SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS, INC., a/k/a :
INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS, INC.), and :
OILSANDS QUEST, INC., :
The Securities and Exchange Commission instituted this proceeding with an Order
Instituting Proceedings (OIP), pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Exchange Act), on September 25, 2015, and the hearing was scheduled to commence on October
19, 2015. The OIP alleges that each Respondent is a corporation with a class of securities
registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act and has
repeatedly failed to file required periodic reports. The Division of Enforcement is seeking to
revoke the registration of Respondents’ securities.
The OIP provides that each Respondent’s Answer is due within ten days of service of the
OIP on it. See OIP at 3; 17 C.F.R. § 201.220(b). A Respondent that fails to file an Answer
within the time provided will be deemed to be in default, and the undersigned will enter an order
revoking the registration of its securities. See OIP at 3; 17 C.F.R. §§ 201.155(a), .220(f). To
allow time for Answers, the hearing will be postponed sine die, and a prehearing conference will
be held by telephone on January 15, 2016, at 10:00 a.m. EST, if the proceeding has not been
resolved by then.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/S/ Carol Fox Foelak
Carol Fox Foelak
Administrative Law Judge
Listing and Delisting Requirements
Before a company can begin trading on an exchange, it must meet certain initial requirements or "listing standards." The various exchanges set their own standards for listing and continuing to trade a stock. The SEC does not set listing standards.
To be listed initially, a company must meet minimum financial and non-financial standards. Among other things, the standards cover total market value, stock price, and the number of publicly traded shares and shareholders a firm has. After a company's stock starts trading on an exchange, it usually is subject to other, less stringent requirements; if it fails to meet those, the stock can be delisted. As with listing requirements, the standards for delisting shares are not uniform; each exchange has its own requirements. You can find the initial and continued listing requirements on the websites of the New York Stock Exchange and the Nasdaq Stock Market. Neither the OTC Markets Group(f/k/a Pink Sheets) nor the OTC Bulletin Board has listing standards, although the SEC requires companies to be current in their filings before their stock can be quoted on the OTCBB.
You can find out whether the New York Stock Exchange is seeking to delist a company by visiting the Reviews/Suspensions section of the NYSE's website. The Nasdaq Stock Market has a similar list available online.
-----------------------------------
The China-US law discrepancies were always known, and the swindled investors' wrath is misguided. But what a beautiful mafia's focus-pocus it is "for investors protection"!!
ECOMIKE, where did you get it that ABAT is pink now?? This is apparently wrong. It does not trade in pink and cannot. For the listing in pink requires complete financials for previous years.
The Manitowoc is in preparation for a split in first qt 2016 into two subsidiaries. Most likely, they both will be sold then at substantially high prices.
Rights though are not given -- rights are taken! So, without a word to SEC, the four years delinquent ABAT just started to trade in pink. Bravo!
On the other hand, ABAT has to provide audited financials to SEC and before starting trading in pinks. Nothing may suggest any fairness here except crystal honesty of CEO.
chevelle 396:
they are taking steps to present an audit pratts was hired do it for abat
thank you for info. Where did you got it?
The initial decision re sh revocation was filed on Nov 13. The final order is expected during Dec 7-11. With amazing display of integrity, ABAT is just ignoring all this. Like in the saying, "dog barking -- man working."
Remember the shaken CEO's letter of April 2011 to the shareholders with reproaches to U.S. and vows to get away from its mafias like NASDAG?