Replies to post #167720 on Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[Jetmek_03052]

As to your claim:

“another SEC ALJ has ALREADY RULED in another same case that they are not needed if Super 10K is filed”

I just read through all of the filings. What you claim is correct ONLY if the SEC has not claimed “material deficiencies” with the financial numbers quoted.

The SEC DID claim that MATERIAL DEFICIENCIES EXIST.

In the case you are citing, the ALJ ruled that all the Q’s weren’t needed in the Super 10K IN THAT CASE. But he also said that this was because there were no material deficiencies in THAT CASE. He went on to imply that if there HAD BEEN material deficiencies in THAT CASE, he would have required that all the Q numbers be accounted for.

Since the SEC Enforcement Division cited material deficiencies in the most recently filed DBMM Super 10K, this would require another amended filing. I COULD copy and paste the ENTIRE brief here. But instead, I’ll just quote you the date of the filing and the page that the relevant information can be found.

Please go to the brief filed on April 10, 2019. The relevant passage dealing with your contention that a previous ALJ “cleared” a super 10K without 10Q info can be found on page 5 of the filing.

The passage reads:

“Digital Brand next cites Judge Grimes' decision denying summary disposition in Can­ Cal Resources, Ltd, Release No. 6525 (March 28, 2019) for the proposition that a consolidated 10-K can cure a missing filing. What Judge Grimes said was "It is at least arguable, however, that as long as the consolidated report contains NO MATERIAL DEFICIENCIES, the issuer could be considered current in its filings." Since Corp. Fin. did not find any deficiencies in Can-Cal's consolidated report, Judge Grimes held that Can-Cal's Super 10-K was
distinguishable from those addressed in Tara Gold and Calais, which were materially deficient. Can-Cal, at 3 and 9, n.49. Whether Judge Grimes was correct in distinguishing Tara Gold and Calais is not at issue here because Digital Brand's Super 10-K did contain material deficiencies.”

The KEY part of that whole statement lies in the last paragraph.

The SEC HAS IDENTIFIED material deficiencies with the latest DBMM filing. It therefore NEEDS to have the relevant delinquent Q data!

The SEC is asking that DBMM address the material deficiencies that exist with the delinquent Q’s!They call the entire filing deficient!

It will have to be refiled. There is no other way to do it!