| Followers | 33 |
| Posts | 2149 |
| Boards Moderated | 0 |
| Alias Born | 12/30/2010 |
Monday, November 07, 2022 7:35:14 PM
Hello Renee... thank you for your very detailed post concerning DBMM. However, I see that there was nothing said about Judge Foelak's determination in this matter with her dismissal of the proceeding.
In every A.L.J. Final Decision the A.L.J. revoked a company's stock registration(s) by citing "An issuer’s failure to file periodic reports violates “a central provision of the Exchange Act , depriving both existing and prospective holders of its registered stock of the ability to make informed investment decisions based on current and reliable information." The A.L.J.'s also cite maintaining inviolate integrity of the Markets by revoking the registrations of companies that "egregiously failed" to file requisite Financials.*** A.L.J. Foelak rendered 100's of those FINAL Decisions!!! BUT NOT THIS ONE. Why did she have a change of heart in the DBMM matter. Could it be that she saw something quite different regarding the delinquent filings. And as she stated in her response, she did not see any reason to revoke DBMM. Can you explain why she came to a different conclusion with this case, especially as you stated she rendered 100's of final decisions to revoke....but not DBMM. Again why do you thing she did that?
In every A.L.J. Final Decision the A.L.J. revoked a company's stock registration(s) by citing "An issuer’s failure to file periodic reports violates “a central provision of the Exchange Act , depriving both existing and prospective holders of its registered stock of the ability to make informed investment decisions based on current and reliable information." The A.L.J.'s also cite maintaining inviolate integrity of the Markets by revoking the registrations of companies that "egregiously failed" to file requisite Financials.*** A.L.J. Foelak rendered 100's of those FINAL Decisions!!! BUT NOT THIS ONE. Why did she have a change of heart in the DBMM matter. Could it be that she saw something quite different regarding the delinquent filings. And as she stated in her response, she did not see any reason to revoke DBMM. Can you explain why she came to a different conclusion with this case, especially as you stated she rendered 100's of final decisions to revoke....but not DBMM. Again why do you thing she did that?
Recent DBMM News
- Form 10-Q - Quarterly report [Sections 13 or 15(d)] • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 04/14/2026 08:45:29 PM
- Form 10-Q - Quarterly report [Sections 13 or 15(d)] • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 01/14/2026 09:46:30 PM
- Form 10-K - Annual report [Section 13 and 15(d), not S-K Item 405] • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 11/28/2025 10:01:05 PM
- Form 10-Q - Quarterly report [Sections 13 or 15(d)] • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 07/15/2025 09:01:51 PM
