Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[Gotham Bay Group]

This is actually factual information. But the most important sentence is below.

"IF the review is granted, then the commission will review the case"

Finding very similar cases such as DBMM's that went this far is difficult. Most companies never bothered to challenge. So when this happens in law, one of the next best "indicators" is finding challenged cases within the general jurisdiction that have traveled a similar distance through the legal process. You can take this information and match it too how many cases requested a review and then match that to how many were granted a review after already spending 2 years in the process which received a dismissal. You can finally get an idea of the likelyhood that a review would be granted after the above due diligence.
I already know the answer to this but I recommend others examine it as well. The information is public and will paint a very good picture as to what is going to happen next in all probability.
Review boards, upper courts, etc. inherently do not like setting new precedents as they can often cause a backlash against previous decisions.
That being said, IF they do decide to review it, will be solely because they have found an error in this case that will possibly set a new precedent or a grave legal mistake.
After reviewing several revocation cases I do not believe a new precedent has been discovered here, rather this is one of the extremely few examples of a company challenging a revocation. This situation has likely occurred before but never reached this level of decision due to previous organizations accepting the revocation or being unable to follow through with the process. I believe the push back here is because this case could very well be one future litigation is held too. Possibly not beneficial to future SEC cases regarding similar circumstances. IMO