Plastic2Oil Inc (PTOI)

[dreaminbig]

JBI had to have known the Wells Notice was a possibility during the investigation. How long do these investigations take? Months? A year or more? There was plenty of time for shares to get traded.
The Company produced a large quantity of documents, and cooperated with the Enforcement staff, with regard to the investigation preceding the Wells Notice.

Then there was the other 8K about the increase in activity and the increase in stock price that came out late in April.

JBI, Inc. Comments on Recent Trading Activity and Discloses Potential Transactions

JBI, Inc. (the “Company” or “JBII”) stated today that it was concerned about this month’s significant trading volumes and stock price increase, which appear to be unrelated to any disclosures by the Company.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390011002099/f8k042011_jbi.htm

AND then there is the 5th amendment to the 8K regarding the Pakit purchase and the accounting of the acquisitions.

Explanatory Note: This Amendment No.5 on Form 8-K (the “Form 8-K”) originally filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 1, 2009 amends the Form 8-K in order to include as exhibits the Pro Forma Combined Consolidated Statements as presented for our acquisitions of our Javaco and Pak-it subsidiaries. On August 24th, 2009, 310 Holdings (“JBI” or, the “Company”) purchased Javaco, Inc. (“Javaco”), and on September 30th 2009, JBI purchased Pak-It, LLC ("Pak-It).

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390011003146/f8k082409a5_jbi.htm

Then the Well's Notice filing from JBI.
Item 8.01 Other Events

On July 14, 2011, the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Division of Enforcement issued a “Wells Notice” to JBI, Inc., ( the “Company”) indicating that the staff intended to recommend that the SEC file a civil lawsuit alleging that the Company violated certain provisions of the federal securities laws . Based on communications with the Enforcement staff, the Company believes that the proposed lawsuit relates to the Company’s subsequently restated financial statements for the third quarter of 2009, which were included in its Form 10-Q filed on November 16, 2009 and its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2009, which were included in its 2009 Form 10-K filed on March 31, 2010. The restatement concerned the Company’s valuation of media credits, accounting for certain acquisitions, and equity issuances. Based on information obtained from the Enforcement staff, the Company believes that the staff may also recommend naming one or more current and former officers of the Company as defendants in the proposed lawsuit.

Under the SEC’s procedures, a Wells Notice indicates that the SEC Enforcement staff has decided to recommend instituting litigation, but the Commission itself has not decided whether or not to approve such a recommendation. The Company has the opportunity to respond to the SEC staff before a decision is made whether to take any adverse action. The Company produced a large quantity of documents, and cooperated with the Enforcement staff, with regard to the investigation preceding the Wells Notice.

The Company cannot predict the outcome of the dispute with the SEC, including whether a lawsuit will be filed or the terms of any settlement that may be reached. The Company has been given an opportunity to respond to the Wells Notice, and will decide how to proceed based on consultation with its litigation counsel.

To the best of the Company’s knowledge, the Enforcement staff’s concerns do not currently encompass matters unrelated to the restatement. The Company took a number of proactive steps in connection with the restatement, including hiring additional accounting staff members, retaining a reputable, top-30 accounting firm (WithumSmith+Brown) to provide relevant expertise, and upgrading its accounting software. Previously, on May 21, 2010, the Company disclosed that its financial statements for the indicated time periods should no longer be relied upon.

The Company is deeply concerned about the recent significant trading activity and stock price decrease, which were unaccompanied by any Company disclosures during the 48 hours prior to receiving the Wells Notice. The Company was unaware of the notice until shortly prior to its receipt, and members of management did not trade in the Company’s stock during this period.

The Company does not anticipate that the notice will negatively impact its business operations.