posted
Damn, I missed it all too. Legal and Wallace going toe to toe, the return of dwman, everything. How come all the good stuff happens when I'm not around?
IP: Logged |
posted
"3) Didn't file much more then one filing listing a change of address to another false place. Have till the 17th. Excuse, didn't keep good records there are holes. Even for tax purpose a business must keep all receipts and books for 7 years just in case of a audit. Doesn't take knowledge of a public company to know that."
Wallace,
while you are thinking about sending evidence to SEC. You may want to send the PR about having holes in records to IRS. SEC may be slow but IRS will reem him a new one if he has been lieing on his taxes.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
I understood what you were saying. The one problem that always cropped up in the past discussions was that very question. It never made any sense to me.
I am very pleased that you do read forums such as this and bring up questions that are important to anyone considering trading in securities. I believe that is why many of us are here and continuing to post. I meant no offense. As far as I am concerned, CMKX is not an investment, it is a bottomless pit filled with vipers and handlers. I guarantee you, if I could find anything positive to say about it, I would. I am sorry to say that I cannot....because it doesn't appear to exist.
IP: Logged |
posted
no problem wallace i just wanted to make my postition clear. i was tring not to come on as a basher/troublemaker, people who know me know i just like to make observations with humor and trust me i took no offense to what you said and could understand why you would be a little bit upset and what i said... no harm man just being nosey really:)
-------------------- M.M. Semester #3 started,Only 7 more semesters to go. Why, in an age where information is so easy to get, cant we find information on one man. Experience is something you dont get until just after you need it.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bill1352: oh oh looks like the cult has a new roger glen on their side & we all know just how much he helped the situation.....lol
**************************** Bill, you noticed the similarities too, huh? That was my first thought when I read the CV. Is this guy going to be able to walk on water too? Maybe he just has to wear hip boots to get through all the BS.
IP: Logged |
while you are thinking about sending evidence to SEC. You may want to send the PR about having holes in records to IRS. SEC may be slow but IRS will reem him a new one if he has been lieing on his taxes.'
My understanding is that the IRS reviews all types of court and SEC documentation for just such things for the obvious reasons. When it becomes a matter of official records they can really sink their teeth into the meat. Get it? "Where's the beef?"
IP: Logged |
posted
the truth is if i'm part of the cult instead of crying fowl against the SEC i'd be saying thank you. when the SEC suspended trading the statement say they wanted to see where the shares were going, in simple terms. this in no small part probably stems from the USCA investigation. the SEC saw things that were not correct. they may not be the most helpful organization to shareholders & those that invest in stocks but they aren't evil unless they aren't doing as you want. for months even the cult has said cmkx needs to give us the facts, the o/s, the share structure. the results of the core samples, any results from new samples. is there any money other then selling shares coming in. even the believed n/s will be seen by a complete investigation. the SEC is failing shareholders in that we can see the cmkx responce but what are the exact offenses . the responce mentions differant paragraphs & sections, i want to see those paragraphs & sections. instead of saying how wrong the SEC is in doing this the cult should be thanking the SEC, they may end up with info cmkx has not wanted to share with them. if all is well as they believe then nothing bad will happen. all the company info will be known & maybe the cmkx pps will get off the pps floor & head up. if all is not well & UC is a crook as the bashers believe then why not find out now & move on with your lives, get out of dreamworld & join reality again, that is if the kool-aide hasn't made that impossible.
-------------------- "keep your stick on the ice & your cup firmly in place"
IP: Logged |
quote:the SEC saw things that were not correct. they may not be the most helpful organization to shareholders & those that invest in stocks but they aren't evil unless they aren't doing as you want.
That's a great point. How many would argue with shutting down Enron and Worldcom? Sure, it hurt current shareholders but protected untold numbers of future investors from suffering the same fate. Take a look at who they've investigated and shut down in the past. Those were all good things but in this one case, the SEC is a horribly corrupt entity that is out to protect their own self interests and defend a corrupt system? I just don't see it. As Bill said, the only reason they're evil this time is because they're not doing what you want.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Upside: Damn, I missed it all too. Legal and Wallace going toe to toe, the return of dwman, everything. How come all the good stuff happens when I'm not around?
quote:Originally posted by ed19363: The question still remains, Where are the PRs?? Legal, you can post 144 pages of crap from other boards, and until that question is answered, your postings are B+U+L+L+S+H+I+T !!!!!
B R A V O
From now on everytime leagle spams more nonsense I'm going to counterspam with the above message.
Leagle you are 0 for 1000 give up and go home.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Monopoly Money: question.. Doc do you have anything in this company?
Still holding 10 mil useless shares. Got in at 0.0001 and now can't even get out at 0.0001. So yes I am a shareholder and have every right to complain and also complain to the SEC.
Doc, for a thousand bucks, you got a front row seat. Why wouldn't you want to see the end of the play? Or have you bought the basher line that the play is already over. Glenn, Mahue, and Stoecklein wrote the final act for this one, not the bashers.
Leagle sorry, please go back to posting other peoples posts. When you add your own thoughts to things,,, it makes you sound like a cartoonish mad scientist that has lost all grasp of reality. All you need to do is start signing your posts with "muhahhahahaha"
IP: Logged |
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- e-Smart Technologies, Inc. (OTC Pink Sheets: ESMT)("e-SMART" or the "Company") announced today that, in a regulatory action initiated in December 2002 by the Division of Enforcement of the Securities & Exchange Commission, the administrative law judge has denied the Division's request for the imposition of a sanction against e-Smart.
In a decision issued on February 3, 2005, the administrative law judge stated that the Company has "hired staff that has undertaken extensive compliance efforts to cure past reporting deficiencies and keep current with ongoing reporting requirements." The law judge further concluded that "based on the company's recent infusion of working capital, signed business contracts, and diligent and expensive efforts to file past due reports, ... I find the likelihood of future violations absent ... " and denied the Division's request for the imposition of a sanction. The Division had proposed revoking the registration of e-Smart's common stock.
Both parties have twenty-one days to appeal this order.
This looks very similar to what CMKX attorney laid out.
It is the case mentioned in the ruling by the Judge.
PPS
-------
pps Dr. Of Diamonds
member is online
Gender: Posts: 157 Re: E-Smart Technologies Inc. « Reply #5 on: Today at 4:54pm »
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- another tid bit about the appeal concern:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA before the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Rel. No. 51309 / March 3, 2005 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING File No. 3-10977
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : : : NOTICE THAT INITIAL DECISION HAS BECOME FINAL The time for filing a petition for review of the initial decision in this proceeding has expired. No such petition has been filed with respect to e-Smart Technologies, Inc., f/k/a Plainview Laboratories, Inc. and the Commission has not chosen to review the decision as to it on its own initiative.
Accordingly, notice is hereby given, pursuant to Rule 360(e) of Commission's Rules of Practice, that the initial decision of the administrative law judge* has become the final decision of the Commission with respect to e-Smart Technologies, Inc. The order contained in that decision denying the Division of Enforcement's request for sanctions against e-Smart Technologies, Inc., for the violations found in the March 4, 2004, Initial Decision is hereby declared effective.
For the Commission by the Office of the General Counsel, pursuant to delegated authority.
posted
Originally posted by ed19363: The question still remains, Where are the PRs?? Legal, you can post 144 pages of crap from other boards, and until that question is answered, your postings are B+U+L+L+S+H+I+T !!!!!
IP: Logged |
If CMKX actually files something before hearing they may get to use that. But after the PR stating the voids in there records and no actually filing that means anything, how can they argue they and working to meeting there obligations.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
posted
If cmkx would file there obligated reports then there is no need to revoke because investors can see what the company has and make a real choice. But that will never happen, revoked!
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
posted
Seems to me that the so called longs ever come up with is other companies PR's and situations. Then claim them as cmkx. Because CMKX has never put anything out that would make this a real investment.
This company found diamonds.
This company hired lawyers and is working on be fully reporting
This company did this and the only thing UC can come up with is someone else messed up and we can't find our records. lol
Were is what we have. Others seem to tell whats going on. And since this is a reporting company they are required to tell us.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ric: Seems to me that the so called longs ever come up with is other companies PR's and situations. Then claim them as cmkx. Because CMKX has never put anything out that would make this a real investment.
This company found diamonds.
This company hired lawyers and is working on be fully reporting
This company did this and the only thing UC can come uo with is someone else messed up and we can't find out records. lol
Were is what we have. Others seem to tell whats going on. And since this is a reporting company they are required to tell us.
I didn't quote the case Ric, the judge did. If you want to see where a judge's thinking is going, read the case law they quote.
IP: Logged |
posted
Men, it just keeps getting deeper. Now we have "the Mahue Factor"...hope it's better than the "Glenn Factor" was.
ESMT does not equal CMKX. Just because one company escaped sanctions, does not mean the other will. "An infusion of working capital"...Hmmm...do we have working capital? I must have missed that PR. Oh, must be all the gold we're shipping from central America. Missed that PR too. How much was it again?? 3 ounces?? "Efforts to file past due reports"....Wow, at least they are filing something. CMKX, however, has filed nothing of note in 2 years?? Oh, I forgot the records all got misplaced while UC was in rehab. Was that rehab for medical purposes of was he at Betty Ford's clinic??
If I ran my business this way, I wouldnt have survived the first two years.
Way to go, CMKX. Let's have some more positive spin on how the PPS will reach $1.00 a share or more....or is it a buyout by CITI??
Keep drinking that Koolaid.... Meanwhile you might check out NCDP if you want to see how a REAL pinksheet company operates.
-------------------- If I give you bad information, please feel free to sue me. I have nothing left anyway. Ed
IP: Logged |
posted
Still, did that company lie on there form 15, miss stating by almost half is no accident, and did they try to get filings in. IF UC tries to state that Roger was hired to get them reporting. The judge will say that was a year ago. Were is a filings. In a year you should have been able to be in compliance by now. Not trying after SEC found problems when investigating another company.
Wheres the beef, matter of fact wheres anything that resembles a filing.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
posted
Someone, Bill, Will or someone else stated they would like to see those attorney's CMKX responses posted by legal as they compared to each of the charges. As far as I can determine, the following has all the charges and various numbered/lettered paragraphs so you may compare the responses to those charges:
I. The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that a public administrative proceeding be, and hereby is, instituted pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against CMKM Diamonds, Inc. (“CMKM Diamonds” or “Respondent”). II. After an investigation, the Division of Enforcement alleges that: A. RESPONDENT 1. CMKM Diamonds, Inc. (File No. 0-26919) is a Nevada corporation based in Las Vegas, Nevada. CMKM Diamonds’ common stock is registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act. CMKM Diamonds is required to file reports pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. B. CMKM DIAMONDS IS DELINQUENT IN ITS PERIODIC FILINGS 2. Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and the rules promulgated thereunder require issuers of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act to file with the Commission current and accurate information in periodic reports, even if the registration is voluntary under Section 12(g). Specifically, Rule 13a-1 requires issuers to file annual reports 2 (Forms 10-K or 10-KSB), and Rule 13a-13 requires issuers to file quarterly reports (Forms 10-Q or 10-QSB). 3. CMKM Diamonds has not filed an Annual Report on either Form 10-K or Form 10-KSB since May 9, 2002, or quarterly reports on either Form 10-Q or Form 10-QSB since November 18, 2002. 4. On July 23, 2003, CMKM Diamonds filed a Form 15 (“Original Form 15”), signed by CMKM Diamonds’ president, indicating that it had approximately 300 holders of record and that it was terminating its registration, and hence its reporting obligations, pursuant to Rule 12g-4(a)(1)(i) under the Exchange Act. Rule 12g-4(a)(1)(i) provides that an issuer with less than 300 holders of record may terminate the registration of its securities. 5. On February 17, 2005, CMKM Diamonds filed an Amended Form 15, also signed by CMKM Diamonds’ president. In the Amended Form 15, CMKM Diamonds stated that it had 698 holders of record when it filed the Original Form 15, that the Original Form 15 was revoked, that Rule 12g-4(a)(1)(i) was inapplicable, and that CMKM Diamonds had reporting obligations under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act. 6. As a result of the foregoing, CMKM Diamonds has failed to comply with Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder. III. In view of the allegations made by the Division of Enforcement, the Commission deems it necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors that a public administrative proceeding be instituted pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Exchange Act to determine: A. Whether the allegations in Section II are true and, in connection therewith, to afford the Respondent an opportunity to establish any defenses to such allegations; and B. Whether the registration of each class of CMKM Diamonds’ securities, pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act, should be suspended for a period not exceeding twelve months, or revoked. IV. IT IS ORDERED that a public hearing for the purpose of taking evidence on the questions set forth in Section III hereof shall be convened at a time and place to be fixed, as provided by Rule 200 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. § 201.200], and before an Administrative Law Judge to be designated by further order as provided by Rule 110 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. § 201.110]. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Respondent shall file an Answer to the allegations contained in this Order Instituting Proceedings within twenty (20) days after service of this Order, as provided by Rule 220 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. § 201.220]. 3 If the Respondent fails to file the directed Answer, or fails to appear at a hearing after being duly notified, the Respondent may be deemed in default and the proceedings may be determined against the Respondent upon consideration of this Order, the allegations of which may be deemed to be true as provided by Rules 155(a), 220(f), 221(f), and 310 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. §§ 201.155(a), 201.220(f), 201.221(f) and 201.310]. This Order shall be served forthwith upon the Respondent pursuant to Rule 141(a) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. § 201.141(a)]. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Administrative Law Judge shall issue an initial decision no later than 120 days from the date of service of this Order, pursuant to Rule 360(a)(2) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. § 201.360(a)(2)]. In the absence of an appropriate waiver, no officer or employee of the Commission engaged in the performance of investigative or prosecuting functions in this or any factually related proceeding will be permitted to participate or advise in the decision of this matter, except as witness or counsel in proceedings held pursuant to notice. Since this proceeding is not “rule making” within the meaning of Section 551 of the Administrative Procedure Act, it is not deemed subject to the provisions of Section 553 delaying the effective date of any final Commission action. By the Commission. Jonathan G. Katz Secretary
IP: Logged |
posted
I see they filed another 8-K today. How funny. They can file that they replied to the SEC questions in a 8-K in one day but they can't file one meaningful filing from 3 years. Is this what they will try to use as they are working on getting the filings complete.
posted
legal wrote: "I didn't quote the case Ric, the judge did. If you want to see where a judge's thinking is going, read the case law they quote." ***********************************
I wouldn't count on it, legal.
All cases differ and this one has your pal Roger Glenn involved as well. He worked at the SEC? Should have known the requirements, right?
There is also Urban Casavant involved. I wonder if he will take the 5th when the judge asks him where all those shares went from the authorized, who got the money and precisely what was that money spent on....verification/proof required! What will he say about his lack of experience with other publicly traded companies?
Come on, man, there's a whole lot of squirming going on, and you know it! That includes the CT bunch of faithfuls.
IP: Logged |
posted
That repost of legal's re e-Smart Technologies was an attempt to mislead readers here. The charges were completely different as follows:
The Order is based on allegations by the Division of Enforcement that:
e-Smart has failed to comply with Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5 by filing materially false and misleading reports with the Commission, by making materially false and misleading claims in press releases, postings on the e-Smart website, and in statements made directly to investors and potential investors concerning, among other things, e-Smart's results of operations, contractual relationships, ownership of technology assets, and projected revenues and profits; and
e-Smart failed to comply with Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rules 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13a-13 while its common stock was registered with the Commission in that it filed materially false and misleading reports with the Commission, and has failed to file required annual and quarterly reports.
legal, do not try to distort the facts as to the charges being different. This one is based upon filing false and misleading reports, not failure to file at all among other things. Hell, I'll bet the faithful would have been most happy with any report (false or otherwise). They certainly would not have known the difference and would have pumped the sh:t out of it!
PS: Going to go play some Texas Hold'em now for a while. Try to keep it clean, legal.
IP: Logged |
posted
Has everyone noticed all the pumpers that have come on this board in the last couple days. They are scared and want me to buy there shares. You know this is a bad stock when the pumper start coming in. Pumpers only pump bad stock. I will hang tight though. There no way I will let them give me there shares. Just ignore them so they will go away. And remember they get paid by the number of responses they get.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ric: Has everyone noticed all the pumpers that have come on this board in the last couple days. They are scared and want me to buy there shares. You know this is a bad stock when the pumper start coming in. Pumpers only pump bad stock. I will hang tight though. There no way I will let them give me there shares. Just ignore them so they will go away. And remember they get paid by the number of responses they get.
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
