Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[Jetmek_03052]

Again. No one cares HOW you look at it.

Here are some questions and answers for you:

Q. Did DBMM and the SEC enter into a proceeding where DBMM was plainly guilty of breaking the filing statutes?
A. Absolutely - even Foelak said as much in her ID, when she heard the case. It is ALSO part of the record!

Q. After hearing the evidence as provided by DBMM and Enforcement, was DBMM ordered revoked by ALJ Jason Patil?
A. Absolutely

Q. Was the revocation order remanded because of the outcome of the LUCIA V. SEC ruling?
A. Absolutely

Q. Is that revocation order STILL part of the record as having occurred?
A. Absolutely

A remand of an order does NOT MEAN it "disappears" and is no longer part of recorded history. The definition of case remand is:

To return a court case to the lower court so the lower court can re-consider the case.

As much as you'd like to forget the revocation order? It is IMPOSSIBLE. It is part of the history of DBMM and it will ALWAYS be part of its record. The ALJ previous to Foelak heard the case presented (with pretty much the same evidence as Foelak listened to the second time) and ordered DBMM TO BE REVOKED.

Deal with it Linda.