ohbull, one problem.
The Securities and Exchange Commission hammers companies who knowingly try to file an exemption.
In BCIT's case, Megas knows there are more than 300 shareholders of record based upon the information he received from the bogus lawsuit.
Urban Casavant made this same mistake.
Instead of looking for exemptions, all Megas has to do is file a request for an extension, show proof he is in the process of having his financials taken care of, and get these suckers filed as quickly as possible.
Don't compound a previous blunder with a new blunder.
Learn from the past...............
CMKM Diamonds Inc., a pink sheet play headed by Saskatchewan native Urban Casavant, is an egregious, repeat securities violator that will likely continue to breach its reporting obligations, according to lawyers for the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) enforcement division.
The U.S. regulator's rather unflattering assessment of CMKM is served up in a June 2 brief filed in the wake of a May 10 administrative hearing. According to the SEC's posthearing brief, the public interest would be best served by revoking the registration of CMKM's common stock.
As previously reported by Stockwatch, the SEC suspended trading in CMKM on March 3. Just as the 10-day trading suspension was set to expire, the SEC launched an administrative proceeding against CMKM.
According to the allegations in the March 16 SEC order instituting proceedings (OIP) against CMKM, the company was in breach of its reporting obligations for not filing required annual reports since May 9, 2002, and quarterly reports since Nov. 18, 2002.
On April 11, CMKM filed its response to the OIP. Represented by Donald Stoecklein, CMKM set out nine affirmative defences.
Among other things, the company claimed that the SEC lacked authority to conduct the proceedings; the allegations failed to state a claim upon which sanctions could be rendered; the proposed sanctions were "punitive remedies against individual and indispensable parties who have not had an opportunity for appearance"; and that a proceeding to revoke or suspend CMKM's securities was premature.
According to the SEC's posthearing brief, all nine of CMKM's affirmative defences were "rightly rejected" by the administrative law judge during a prehearing conference call on April 13.
During the April 13 conference call, Mr. Stoecklein argued that the company had no reporting obligations from July of 2003 when it filed a Form 15 to February of 2005 when it filed an amended Form 15.
According to the SEC, while the court suspected that the original Form 15 may have been "fraudulent," Mr. Stoecklein suggested that it had been filed "in good faith and/or on the advice of counsel."
"At the May 10, 2005, hearing, however, CMKM Diamonds offered no evidence regarding the circumstances surrounding the filing of the Form 15 in July 2003 and offered no evidence supporting an advice-of-counsel defense," the SEC states in its June 2 brief.
"To the contrary, substantial evidence developed at the hearing confirms that at the time CMKM Diamonds filed the Form 15, it knew or should have known that the company had more than 300 shareholders of record and thus that the filing was false," the SEC claims.
