Renee Saturday, 06/03/17 10:13:43 AM Re: None 0 Post # of 150197 DBMM: In all SEC Admin Proceedings for SEC registered stocks that were suspended for Financials / Filings delinquencies the SEC writes crystal clear assertions to explain why the delinquent Filer's stock registration will be revoked. Readers should read other SEC Admin Proceedings for SEC registered stocks that were also suspended for Financials delinquencies. Of all 1,539 similar Suspensions for Financials delinquencies ALL 1,539 had their stock registrations revoked...NO EXCEPTIONS!!!! READ the SEC Suspensions and Revocations Board to LEARN!!!: http://investorshub.advfn.com/SEC-Suspensions-&-Revocations-25334/ http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=127559570 The DBMM Admin Proceeding on May 17,2017: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2017/34-80701.pdf Excerpts: (all black hilites are mine for emphasis and my added comments in brackets are RED) A. RESPONDENTS 1. Digital Brand Media & Marketing Group, Inc. (CIK No. 1127475) is a Florida corporation located in New York, New York with a class of securities registered with the Commission pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12(g). Digital Brand Media & Marketing Group, Inc. is delinquent in its periodic filings with the Commission, having not filed any periodic reports since it filed a Form 10-Q for the period ended May 31, 2015, which reported a net loss of $673,852 for the prior nine months. B. DELINQUENT PERIODIC FILINGS 3. As discussed in more detail above, all of the Respondents are delinquent in their periodic filings with the Commission, have repeatedly failed to meet their obligations to file timely periodic reports, and failed to heed delinquency letters sent to them by the Division of Corporation Finance requesting compliance with their periodic filing obligations or, through their failure to maintain a valid address on file with the Commission as required by Commission rules, did not receive such letters. (it is the repeated failures to file Financials that the SEC A.L.J. will cite to revoke DBMM's stock registration!!) 4. Exchange Act Section 13(a) and the rules promulgated thereunder require issuers of securities registered pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12 to file with the Commission current and accurate information in periodic reports, even if the registration is voluntary under Section 12(g). 5. As a result of the foregoing, Respondents failed to comply with Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder. III: In view of the allegations made by the Division of Enforcement, the Commission deems it necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors that public administrative proceedings be instituted to determine: A. Whether the allegations contained in Section II hereof are true and, in connection therewith, to afford the Respondents an opportunity to establish any defenses to such allegations; and, (as in all LAW whether criminal or Securities Laws ALL charged persons or entities are allowed to defend themselves even when the evidence is incontrovertible; ie., DBMM's delinquencies are FACT) B. Whether it is necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors to suspend for a period not exceeding twelve months, or revoke the registration of each class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act of the Respondents identified in Section II hereof, and any successor under Exchange Act Rules 12b-2 or 12g-3, and any new corporate names of any Respondents. (it is either a 12 month additional Suspension from trading or revocation. In all 1,539 prior Suspensions for delinquencies the A.L.J. has revoked registrations) 10. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents shall file an Answer to the allegations contained in this Order within ten (10) days after service of this Order, as provided by Rule 220(b) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. § 201.220(b) (DBMM filed a response letter yesterday) If Respondents fail to file the directed Answers, or fail to appear at a hearing after being duly notified, the Respondents, and any successor under Exchange Act Rules 12b-2 or 12g-3, and any new corporate names of any Respondents, may be deemed in default and the proceedings may be determined against them upon consideration of this Order, the allegations of which may be deemed to be true as provided by Rules 155(a), 220(f), 221(f), and 310 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. §§ 201.155(a), 201.220(f), 201.221(f), and 201.310. (the SEC A.L.J. cannot use the DEFAULT reasons because DBMM submitted their letter, but now the A.L.J. will cite "repeatedly failed to meet their obligations to file timely periodic reports" as the reason to revoke DBMM's stock registration) To bite the worm of incite is to bite the HOOK of the antagonist . They win .