InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 189
Posts 42563
Boards Moderated 8
Alias Born 03/21/2012

Re: garlickedskicuts post# 13177

Tuesday, 01/24/2017 12:00:25 AM

Tuesday, January 24, 2017 12:00:25 AM

Post# of 47764
Jeez...I gotta do everything?

Here is the quote from the first letter, August 29, 2016):

Exhibit 99.1
1. We note your disclosure of bulk tonnage estimates in your exhibit 99.1 with respect to your Santa Elena property. Only proven and probable reserves may be disclosed in filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Instructions to Item 102 of Regulation S-K. Please revise to remove the bulk tonnage estimates.



https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355677/000000000016090358/filename1.pdf

Mexus decided to ignore the letter, so on September, the SEC issued another letter with this:

We issued comments to you on the above captioned filing on August 29, 2016. As of the date of this letter, these comments remain outstanding and unresolved. We expect you to provide a complete, substantive response to these comments by September 30, 2016.

If you do not respond, we will, consistent with our obligations under the federal securities laws, decide how we will seek to resolve material outstanding comments and complete our review of your filing and your disclosure. Among other things, we may decide to release publicly, through the agency’s EDGAR system, all correspondence, including this letter, relating to the review of your filing, consistent with the staff’s decision to publicly release comment and response letters relating to disclosure filings it has reviewed.



https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355677/000000000016093008/filename1.pdf

Mexus decided they had better do what was asked, and within three days, they filed an amended 10K, with a new version of the Lemas report, minus the bogus tonnage estimates.

Will there be a repeat of this with the Felix Mine?