One Step Ahead

[Bo14172]

CMKX & E-Smart Ruling Cited By The Judge
« Thread started on: Today at 5:45pm »

Posted by PPS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry if this was mentioned, I didn't see it brought up.

http://sev.prnewswire.com/computer-electronics/20050207/NYM08807022005-1.html

SEC ALJ Rules Out Sanction Against e-Smart


WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- e-Smart Technologies, Inc. (OTC Pink Sheets: ESMT)("e-SMART" or the "Company") announced today that, in a regulatory action initiated in December 2002 by the Division of Enforcement of the Securities & Exchange Commission, the administrative law judge has denied the Division's request for the imposition of a sanction against e-Smart.

In a decision issued on February 3, 2005, the administrative law judge stated that the Company has "hired staff that has undertaken extensive compliance efforts to cure past reporting deficiencies and keep current with ongoing reporting requirements." The law judge further concluded that "based on the company's recent infusion of working capital, signed business contracts, and diligent and expensive efforts to file past due reports, ... I find the likelihood of future violations absent ... " and denied the Division's request for the imposition of a sanction. The Division had proposed revoking the registration of e-Smart's common stock.

Both parties have twenty-one days to appeal this order.


This looks very similar to what CMKX attorney laid out.

It is the case mentioned in the ruling by the Judge.

PPS

[Changed the title to "CMKX & E-Smart Ruling Cited By The Judge" as this is more descriptive. - bluediamonds]