CMKX Response to SEC on CMKX Members site

[bluediamonds]

CMKX Response to SEC on CMKX Members site

eegam
Dr. Of Diamonds

member is offline

Gender:
Posts: 118
CMKX Response to SEC on CMKX Members site
« Thread started on: Today at 4:10pm » <br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just got this in. Refer to the site for details. It's a large scanned image, so I won't include the text.

To: Members of the CMKX Group

The answer from CMKX to the charges being brought by the SEC were filed today with Judge Brenda Murray. Please access that filing at www.cmkxownersgroup.com . The document is referenced as “CMKX Answer to OIP”. Mr. Stoecklein was very thorough in responding to the charges brought by the SEC.

At the time of this note, I have received no response from the SEC to our request to have a part in these proceedings. The SEC may still respond in the next few days.

Bill Frizzell

(Edit it's in www.cmkxownersgroup.com/CMKXAnswertoOIP.pdf )

FROM: cmkxdiamond.proboards32.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1113257444

[albertaman]

thats the only good real info on here in a week thanks

[trickwisco]

Can someone tell me how to open this up please.
Thanks

[Bart]

;D ;D

Trick: Download, Adobe Acrobat Reader 5.0.
www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html

Then just click on the stuff in YELLOWl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The answer from CMKX to the charges being brought by the SEC were filed today with Judge Brenda Murray. Please access that filing at www.cmkxownersgroup.com . The document is referenced as “CMKX Answer to OIP”. Mr. Stoecklein was very thorough in responding to the charges brought by the SEC.

;D ;D

[Bart]

;D ;D

I totally agree with this from another board. Very well put together.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Very aggressive response IMO. There is nothing conciliatory in that response other the closing statement asking that the motion be dismissed.According to the response , the SEC has clearly been guilty of an abuse of power with regard to CMKX.They disregarded past filings, they completely set their own timeframe for comformity by ignoring prescribed timetables for filing. They are not allowing for the fact that if past errors in advice were the reason for our mistakes, then that is certainly not grounds for administrative hearings according to SEC guidlines.
There is NO fraud alledged or admitted. If this response does not motivate the SEC to solve the problem, I will be amazed . They now have all to lose and nothing to gain.
This filing has IBM written all over it. It basically states, , if you want to make up the rules as you go along, then we will do the same and you will stand to lose way more then us. WE can and will either merge , or go private and IPO. But if you force the issue , we WILL take you down and rock the financial community in the process.
13 days to make this go away quietly, or risk , not only losing in court, buy even with a win , I can assure you, IBM will have the last word . Mentioning the NSS was a hint to the SEC that this will not be kept quiet much longer. That was [robably the most telling sentence in the filing. Its the first time its been publically alluded to by management.Notice they referenced it by connecting it to shareholders and not stating it as fact. That would have been disallowed. This way , its part of the public record for any further NSS legal action.

This was great. I can't wait for the next act. IBM and his lawfirm hard playing hardball.I bet the SEC has NEVER received a response from a pink or gray sheet company as aggressive as this in many a year , if ever.
-
;D ;D

[joey01]

I also cannot download the document. Can anyone help please!

Is it possible to post the document?


Joey 01

[Bart]

;D ;D

Joey: This thing is 18 pages long. All you have to do is:

Download, Adobe Acrobat Reader 5.0.
www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html

Then just click on the stuff in YELLOWl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The answer from CMKX to the charges being brought by the SEC were filed today with Judge Brenda Murray. Please access that filing at www.cmkxownersgroup.com . The document is referenced as “CMKX Answer to OIP”. Mr. Stoecklein was very thorough in responding to the charges brought by the SEC.

;D ;D

[Bart]

;D ;D

This board has a foot in the grave tonight.

From another board. A lawyers input FWIW:


Lawyer input:

Lawyer with SEC exp. take on Response!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CATAMOUNT from paltalk
SEC Lawyer in Washington D.C.

My feeling is this, I really find it hard to believe that an Administrative Judge will not allow CMKX time to get things together....seems SEC has jumped the gun by filing this before April 17.....almost leads to ulterior motives on the SEC part......I thought this was going to be a slam dunk for the SEC, but after reading CMKX response he feels CMKX has a good argument......the whole suit seemed punitive in nature from the beginning by the SEC and thinks the judge will recognize this

;D ;D

[bhuddason]

This board has a foot in the grave tonight.

From another board. A lawyers input FWIW:


Lawyer input:

Lawyer with SEC exp. take on Response!



bart

your comment was intriguing please ellaborate for this kid on the little bus.
rob

[Bart]

;D ;D

Rob if you mean this remark: "This board has a foot in the grave tonight." I was referring to this board being basically dead tonight. No one is posting anything on our statement back to the SEC or anything at all. The other boards are humming. Not this one.

;D ;D

[fastwalker]

Thanks Blue.

I read the whole report--excellent IMO.
We received more information from the company today, than in the past year combined.
This shows me lots.
The fact that the Naked Short problem is brought up in here, and that Urban and team are ready for whatever the SEC can throw at them is Great!

It sounds to me like the SEC is threatening them more than anything. And Urban is saying--"If you really want to go through with this--okay. But, you failed on your Laches(statute of limitations), and we have the $$ to Win.

If you're in You WIN!


Excellent day for CMKX IMO!

Can't wait until the 17th to see if we file the necessary reports.
KSBRADLEY

[fastwalker]

Overall, it is a very good response, I especially like the "ninth affirmative defense"...lol

started to look at it, just to "work" through it...

FW

[fastwalker]

Administrative Proceedings…SEC vs CMKX

The documents prepared and submitted by our attorney and on our behalf to “answer” the SEC, are very interesting, please spare me the commentary that “yeah, we know that.” It’s the obvious that people often over look, "matter of fact" attitude can and often does result in “missing” the true intent being set forth...remember, we are dealing with Lawyers.


(1).We see, on page 2, that David Coffey was engaged on May18, 2001 until Jan 15, 2003. Mr. Coffey is a CPA

(2). Nov 25, 2002, Cyber enters into a “claims purchase and exploration rights agreement with UC. Read this paragraph to understand the start of the “problem”…none of the “officer at the time, had U.S. public company reporting experience.”<br>
(3). We see that on or about Dec 3, 2002 David DeSormeau came aboard and that “approximatey one month after (February) Mr. DeSormeau’s engagement, CMKX auditor resigned.

(4). Dec 3, 2002 Cyber’s Articles of Incorporation were amended to change its name to Cassavant Kimberlite International, Inc (CMKM)

(5). July 22, 2003 form 15 pursuant to Rule 12g-2(a)(1)(i) was filed as certificate and notice of termination of registration under Section 12(g) of the Act

(6). Feb 5, 2004, CMKM’s articles of incorporation were amended to change its name to CMKX Diamonds Inc 9the “Company”).

(7). June 4, 2004 R.Glenn, Esq to” assist in preparing the required SEC reports in anticipation of requesting a MM to resubmit the Company to the “OTCBB” Mr. Glenn said” We have been retained by the Company to “resolve the problems it has been facing, and we expect to devote significant efforts immediately toward that goal.”<br>
Important note….RG said…. “the Company has advised us that it is dedicated to complying fully with all requirements on it, and we are pleased to act as counsel to it on “that basis.”<br>
During the 3rd or 4th qtr, we see that the SEC caused the issuance of subpoenas, deposed and interrogated CMKM Diamonds’ consultants and management “inclusive” of the Company’s new auditors, the Company’s financial consultant, and Eswards & Angell LLP. It sounds like the matter was very intense; UC was advised to evoke his 5th amendment privilege.

(8). Stoecklein Law Group was retained on 7 Feb 2005. For the period of Feb 15, 16, 17
significant activity transpired and a significant discovery was made, further while the form 15 was “flawed on it’s face, there was no response from the SEC to the Company.”<br>(9) March 2005 “ another” financial firm was retained?

(10). March 16, 2005 SEC –Division of Enforcement filed the Order instituting Administrative proceedings against the company.

(10a)..”the Company believes it to be as a result of the “LA-2937” investigation.
Important Note… “while the actions of the enforcement division are designed to be “remedial,” ( remedial…tending or intended to rectify or improve), they may in fact be causing a “punitive effect” on the Company’s stockholders by further perpetuating a growing “ naked short” position in the Company’s stock, as “alleged by numerous stockholders…..

ummmmh, “as alleged by numerous stockholders.” This is an interesting statement!

What do you guys think it means?

[fastwalker]

would be surprised, given the "time line, the admissions and the clarity of those admission, that the judge will respond in any manner other than favorable to CMKX.

It appears that given the "close" connection, as indicated by the activity of the LA-2937 investigation, a "linkage" was attempted by the SEC, to address discrepancies it had discovered.

If this "linkage was not "established" then the matter is not resolved and consequentially, the SEC will utilize the Judge to hear the "potentiality of the linkage as probable cause to "reprimand CMKX.

Sound punitive to me, but then I'm not a lawyer, just a good old boy from Texas...lol

[fastwalker]

Now that was a response!!! (by gr8hiker )

gr8hiker
Diamondologist

member is offline

Posts: 454
Now that was a response!!!
« Thread started on: Today at 6:40pm » <br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very aggressive response IMO. There is nothing conciliatory in that response other the closing statement asking that the motion be dismissed.According to the response , the SEC has clearly been guilty of an abuse of power with regard to CMKX.They disregarded past filings, they completely set their own timeframe for comformity by ignoring prescribed timetables for filing. They are not allowing for the fact that if past errors in advice were the reason for our mistakes, then that is certainly not grounds for administrative hearings according to SEC guidlines.

There is NO fraud alledged or admitted. If this response does not motivate the SEC to solve the problem, I will be amazed . They now have all to lose and nothing to gain.

This filing has IBM written all over it. It basically states, , if you want to make up the rules as you go along, then we will do the same and you will stand to lose way more then us. WE can and will either merge , or go private and IPO. But if you force the issue , we WILL take you down and rock the financial community in the process.

13 days to make this go away quietly, or risk , not only losing in court, buy even with a win , I can assure you, IBM will have the last word . Mentioning the NSS was a hint to the SEC that this will not be kept quiet much longer. That was probably the most telling sentence in the filing. Its the first time its been publically alluded to by management.Notice they referenced it by connecting it to shareholders and not stating it as fact. That would have been disallowed. This way , its part of the public record for any further NSS legal action.

This was great. I can't wait for the next act. IBM and his lawfirm hard playing hardball.I bet the SEC has NEVER received a response from a pink or gray sheet company as aggressive as this in many a year , if ever.

From: cmkxdiamond.proboards32.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1113266409