Thursday, December 05, 2019 11:48:37 PM
Issue 1. Did the Law Judge err by failing to follow the standard for determining sanctions in a· Section 120) proceeding as set forth in lmpax Laboratories, Inc., Rel. No. 34-57864 (May 23, 2008) and Absolute Potential, Inc., Rel. No. 34-71866 (Apr. 4, 2014) ?
For this one, even a middle school student can understand that Absolute Potentials cannot be compared with DBMM as DBMM is a real company with business, clients, revenue, employees, IT awards, clients recommendations, is current in filings with audited fins since more than 1+ years and much more while ABSOLUTE POTENTIAL, INC. was
1. a SHELL,
2. did NOT file for 5 years
3. Thomas F. Duszynski is Absolute's sole employee, director, and officer
4. Thomas owned 97% of OS
5. Absolute Potentials Inc continued to struggle with its ability to establish and maintain "internal control over financial reporting
6. And many more points in below PDF
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/opinions/2014/34-71866.pdf
Issue 2. Did the -Law Judge err by concluding that Respondent had cured its initial fil~ failures and was current on its reporting obligations despite Corp Fin's opinion to the contrary ?
SEC attorney Samantha has been in the case for a few months now but in spite of SEC Corp Finance giving approval to DBMM filings she continued to lied and even lied in petition that DBMM filings don't have SEC Corp Finance approval. See the text from DBMM SEC counsel letter dated October 3rd, 2019, which was uploaded by SEC after 1 month. REMEMBER ALL ? We have been requesting SEC to upload DBMM letters to Judge and SEC did not upload DBMM letters for more than a month. This is the reason. SEC did not want us to know that SEC Corp Finance has reviewed DBMM filings and has given their approval. See the extract from DBMM letter dated October 3rd, 2019.
"DBMM has, since that submission by Enforcement, continued its discussions with Corporation Finance and recently received confirmation from them that language that we had proposed was acceptable and remedied the prior deficiencies. The Company then, yesterday, filed those amendments with language."
Below is the link to DBMM letter dated October 3rd, 2019 containing above paragraph.
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/apdocuments/3-17990-event-107.pdf
Samantha has to let it go else it will damage SEC reputation further
Good luck to all DBMM shareholders.
Recent DBMM News
- Form 10-Q - Quarterly report [Sections 13 or 15(d)] • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 01/16/2024 09:32:32 PM
- Form 10-K - Annual report [Section 13 and 15(d), not S-K Item 405] • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 11/29/2023 09:31:08 PM
- Form 10-Q - Quarterly report [Sections 13 or 15(d)] • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 07/17/2023 09:15:45 PM
Mass Megawatts Announces $220,500 Debt Cancellation Agreement to Improve Financing and Sales of a New Product to be Announced on July 11 • MMMW • Jun 28, 2024 7:30 AM
VAYK Exited Caribbean Investments for $320,000 Profit • VAYK • Jun 27, 2024 9:00 AM
North Bay Resources Announces Successful Flotation Cell Test at Bishop Gold Mill, Inyo County, California • NBRI • Jun 27, 2024 9:00 AM
Branded Legacy, Inc. and Hemp Emu Announce Strategic Partnership to Enhance CBD Product Manufacturing • BLEG • Jun 27, 2024 8:30 AM
POET Wins "Best Optical AI Solution" in 2024 AI Breakthrough Awards Program • POET • Jun 26, 2024 10:09 AM
HealthLynked Promotes Bill Crupi to Chief Operating Officer • HLYK • Jun 26, 2024 8:00 AM