After the law judge issued her opinion, however, e-Smart filed annual and quarterly reports on a timely basis.15 Thus, the investing public now has access to current, audited financial information about the Company. Moreover, the Company has begun to fill the gaps in its reporting history by filing the reports it failed to file during the period between the filing of its registration statement and the issuance of the OIP.16 Although we consider e-Smart's violations serious, we also believe the Company's subsequent filing history is an important factor to be considered in determining whether revocation is "necessary or appropriate for the protection of investors."17 Under the circumstances, therefore, we believe it is appropriate to provide the law judge an opportunity to assess her sanctioning .determination in light of e-Smart's subsequent reporting18 record.
"Having reconsidered the Steadman factors in light of e-Smart’s subsequent filings and recent compliance, I deny the Division’s renewed request for revocation of the registration of eSmart’s common stock and conclude, under the circumstances, that no sanction should be imposed for e-Smart’s violations."
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
