OTC Markets has discontinued the display of quotes on www.otcmarkets.com for this security because it has been labeled Caveat Emptor (Buyer Beware) and because adequate current information has not been made available by the issuer of the securities. It has been labeled Caveat Emptor for one of the following reasons:
¦Questionable Promotion — The security is being promoted to the public, but adequate current information about the issuer has not been made available to the public. ¦Spam — The security is the subject of spam promotion having the effect of encouraging trading of the issuer's securities. ¦Investigation of Fraud — There is a known investigation of fraudulent activity involving the company, its securities or insiders. ¦Suspension/Halt — A Regulatory Authority has halted or suspended trading for public interest concerns (i.e. not a news or earning halt). ¦Disruptive Corporate Actions — The security or issuer is the subject of corporate actions, such as reverse mergers or serial stocks splits and name changes, without adequate current information being publicly available. ¦Unsolicited Quotes — The security has only been quoted on an unsolicited basis since it entered the public markets and the issuer has not made adequate current information available to the public. ¦Other Public Interest Concern — There is, in OTC Markets' view, a public interest concern.
as I've learned recently. The SEC I don't think wants to go at a Pink unless compelled too by shareholders. As they are a service now they (SEC) have an obligation to act on behalf of wronged shareholders. It's neither an investor's capability nor solely the SEC. Once shareholders complain to the SEC now they have a right to ask the company for required disclosure(s). To my understanding that is how the system works John. I don't believe it is dependent on ONE complaint I believe they need several minimum, before the SEC is obliged to act on said company. They also of course must agree there is not enough fair disclosure before the company gets slapped with CE. This is my best understanding how the system works.
You're right it's not good at all it's a very serious handicap for investors and company. I'm not sure but Pinksheets may have been drawn into this also. After all they are the ones trying to rid themselves of the rift raft companies defrauding retail investors with their new tiered structure. To some extent they must be involved also. No it's not good and what is worse the company is down playing the seriousness of the matter by keeping shareholders in the dark. The question going begging: why can't Identa give the SEC what they ask and get themselves reinstated? The longer identa takes to satisfy regulators the greater the damage to the company's reputation. I have to agree with you it's looking very much like the fat lady is about to bellow.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
