Replies to post #342392 on ERHC Energy Inc (ERHE)

[Opus X]

Hey Thanks Lucky!

So it was not determined that it would be in the public interest to:

“it is necessary and appropriate for the protection of
investors to suspend for a period not exceeding twelve months, or revoke the registration of each
class of [ERHC’s] securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act.”

IN CONCLUSION:

We deny the Division’s motion for a ruling on the pleadings.
Applying these principles, we deny the Division’s motion for a ruling on the pleadings
for two reasons. First, the Division does not cite or apply the controlling standard. A movant
must show that “even accepting all of the non-movant’s factual allegations as true and drawing
all reasonable inferences in the non-movant’s favor, the movant is entitled to a ruling as a matter
of law.”34
The Division does not identify and cite to undisputed allegations of the OIP and assert
that they entitle it to the relief it seeks, as it must.
35
ERHC averred in its answer that it had “duly
and timeously [sic] filed its periodic reports for over 10 years,” and cited pending litigation
subject to a state court “sealing order” as “restraining any disclosure” and “depriving [ERHC] of
the resources to meet certain regulatory obligations.” The Division focuses only on ERHC’s
concession that its Form 10-Q is delinquent and does not address the substance of its answer.
Second, the record is insufficient for us to determine the public interest at this time. As
explained above, Section 12(j) proceedings are often resolved based on motions for summary
disposition. But because the Division filed a motion for a ruling on the pleadings under Rule
250(a), none of the additional materials beyond the pleadings that we would consider under Rule
250(b) are before us now.
36
And we will not convert the Division’s motion into a motion for
summary disposition for the reasons explained above.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Division of Enforcement’s motion for a ruling on
the pleadings against ERHC Energy, Inc., is denied.
By the Commission.
Vanessa A. Countryman
Secretary

[Krombacher]

Personally, I'm really glad that shorts are covering.

I think they're making a smart move, but unfortunately it makes it that much harder for other shorts to cover who will likely end up holding the bag.

Krombacher