Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[janice shell]

So, they are current now.

Yes and no:

Finally, the Law Judge's finding that DB had remedied its past violations and had complied with its current reporting obligations was clearly erroneous in light of CorpFin's uncontested opinion that DB's amended curative and subsequent filings were materially deficient.

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/apdocuments/3-17990-event-116.pdf

I call it a very brilliant strategy, don't you?

No. The company could have simply accepted revocation of registration back in 2017. The SEC would have suggested that. Had DBMM said yes, once registration had been revoked, it could simply have prepared two years' worth of financial reports and filed them with a new Form 10 registration statement. That would have become effective in 60 days. Meanwhile, a sponsoring market maker would have submitted a Form 211 to FINRA, and in all likelihood DBMM would have been back on the Pinks--not the Greys--within a few more months.

Instead, the company chose to spend what was no doubt a lot of money on high-priced lawyers.