Replies to post #97201 on Decision Diagnostics Corp (DECN)

[IPwatcher]

Can you post a link?

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.550805/gov.uscourts.nysd.550805.47.0.pdf


The letter hints at the likely outcome. There are 2 defendants in this case: Berman personally and DECN as a corporate entity. It seems untenable that the DECN corporate entity will be in a position to retain new counsel so a default judgement against DECN seems likely.

Berman could defend himself, but it is difficult to see to what end? A default judgement would be where I would place my bets there as well. Although who can tell.

A default judgement against both seems likely. Then whatever additional sanction the court can impose (which is likely to be de jure rather than de facto given the circumstances imo) will follow on.

[IPwatcher]

So what next if there is a default judgement against DECN and Berman?
If Berman engages it will be only to plead mitigation. Since the evidentiary bar on criminal cases is higher than civil cases, and the criminal case has been conceded, the SEC have a gimme here.
If DECN as a legal entity even still exists, I would expect it to be formally dissolved involuntarily for delinquency, not to mention insolvency.
As for Berman himself, well I would expect that this is a case where "the corporate veil would be pierced" due to his obvious serious misconduct, and the sins and liabilities of DECN would land on him personally.
As far as the litigation is concerned, the 'prayer for relief' reads as follows:

WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that the Court:
I.
Permanently enjoin defendants Decision Diagnostics Corp. and Keith Berman from
directly or indirectly violating the applicable provisions and rules of the federal securities laws as
alleged and asserted above.
II.
Enter an Order requiring defendants Decision Diagnostics Corp. and Keith Berman to
pay civil money penalties pursuant to Section 21(d) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)].
III.
Pursuant to Section 21(d)(2) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(2)], prohibit
defendant Keith Berman from acting as an officer or director of any issuer that has a class of
securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78l] or that is
required to file reports pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78o(d)].
IV.
Enter an Order barring Berman from participating in an offering of penny stock,
including engaging in activities with a broker, dealer, or issuer for purposes of issuing, trading,
or inducing or attempting to induce the purchase or sale of any penny stock, pursuant to Section
21(d)(6) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(6)].
V.
Retain jurisdiction of this action in accordance with the principles of equity and the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in order to implement and carry out the terms of all orders and
decrees that may be entered, or to entertain any suitable application or motion for additional
relief within the jurisdiction of this Court.
VI.
Grant such other and further relief as this Court may determine to be just, equitable, and
necessary.
Case 1:20-cv-10658-LAP Document 1 Filed 12/17/20 Page 20 of 21

What this means:
Clause I means very little in practice, unless he tries it again, in which case he could be held in contempt. It means "stop this fraud!"... but since he is now in jail, that has already happened!
Clause II probably means very little in practice, except to double down on Berman's indigence. There may be a dollar amount imposed as a badge of shame, but that won't ever be repaid.
Clause III could affect his livelihood subsequently as he would be banned from holding office in any incorporated company. No more C suite jobs for Keith.
Clause IV basically bars him from raising corporate finance for any of his ventures, which was how he had funded his lifestyle hitherto.
Clause V puts him under the scrutiny of the court, and prevents him from trying his luck in another state or jurisdiction
Clause VI means basically "Anything else you can think of to square up his victims!"

He will probably never be able to use a personal credit card, let alone form a limited company, ever again.