decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Trading in SCO's shares suspended by the SEC
Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 06:52 PM EDT

Trading in SCO shares has been suspended. Here's the SEC press release. It seems not filing anything for a couple of years gets the SEC's attention eventually, even if nothing else does:
The Commission temporarily suspended trading in the securities of these fourteen issuers due to a lack of current and accurate information about the companies because they have not filed periodic reports with the Commission in over two years.
So a temporary suspension. Meanwhile, one presumes the sale of substantially all of SCO's assets to unXis has happened. The judge on March 7 gave Novell 14 days to appeal, if they chose to, and they chose not to.

The text:

*****************************

Securities and Exchange Commission Suspends Trading in the Securities of Fourteen Issuers for Failure to Make Required Periodic Filings

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced the temporary suspension of trading in the securities of the following issuers, commencing at 9:30 a.m. EDT on April 5, 2011 and terminating at 11:59 p.m. EDT on April 18, 2011.
  • Sabratek Corp. (SBTKQ)
  • SAN Holdings, Inc. (SNZH)
  • SBD International, Inc. (n/k/a Solargy Systems, Inc.) (SLGS)
  • Scantek Medical, Inc. (SKMLQ)
  • SciLabs Holdings, Inc. (SILH)
  • The SCO Group, Inc. (SCOXQ)
  • Secure Technologies Group, Inc. (SCTC)
  • Secured Digital Applications, Inc. (SDGL)
  • Senco Sensors, Inc. (SNCOF)
  • Sentex Sensing Technology, Inc. (SNTX)
  • Serefex Corp. (SFXC)
  • SinoFresh HealthCare, Inc. (SFSH)
  • Sonoma College, Inc. (SNMA)
  • Source Petroleum, Inc. (SOPO)
The Commission temporarily suspended trading in the securities of these fourteen issuers due to a lack of current and accurate information about the companies because they have not filed periodic reports with the Commission in over two years. This order was entered pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act).

The Commission cautions brokers, dealers, shareholders and prospective purchasers that they should carefully consider the foregoing information along with all other currently available information and any information subsequently issued by these companies.

Brokers and dealers should be alert to the fact that, pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 15c2-11, at the termination of the trading suspensions, no quotation may be entered relating to the securities of the subject companies unless and until the broker or dealer has strictly complied with all of the provisions of the rule. If any broker or dealer is uncertain as to what is required by the rule, it should refrain from entering quotations relating to the securities of these companies that have been subject to a trading suspension until such time as it has familiarized itself with the rule and is certain that all of its provisions have been met. Any broker or dealer with questions regarding the rule should contact the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission in Washington, DC at (202) 551-5720. If any broker or dealer enters any quotation which is in violation of the rule, the Commission will consider the need for prompt enforcement action.

If any broker, dealer or other person has any information which may relate to this matter, they should immediately communicate it to the Delinquent Filings Group of the Division of Enforcement at (202) 551-5466, or by e-mail at DelinquentFilings@sec.gov. (Rel. 34-64179)


  


Trading in SCO's shares suspended by the SEC | 210 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections here please.
Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 07:03 PM EDT
If any are needed, please indicate the nature of the correction in the title of
your post.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off topic here please
Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 07:05 PM EDT
If you put anything on-topic in this thread, someone will devise a suitable
punishment.

Please remember to make clickable links where possible.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Newspick discussions here please
Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 07:07 PM EDT
Please remember to put the title of the relevant Groklaw newspick in the title
of your post.

It is most helpful to also put a clickable link to the relevant article in the
body of your post, so it can still be easily found when the Newspick has
scrolled off the bottiom of the page.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Comes transcript work can go here
Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 07:09 PM EDT
If you are assisting PJ by transcribing those documents, which reveal a lot
about M$, you will already know what to do.

Thanks!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Trading in SCO's shares suspended by the SEC
Authored by: hans on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 07:21 PM EDT
"Meanwhile, one presumes the sale of substantially all of SCO's assets to
unXis has happened. The judge on March 7 gave Novell 14 days to appeal, if they
chose to, and they chose not to."

Just business, I suppose, nothing personal. One wonders exactly what kind of
business.

Hans

[ Reply to This | # ]

Trading in SCO's shares suspended by the SEC
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 07:33 PM EDT
SCOXQ's 3-month average is under 8,000 shares a day.

At 10 cents a share that's $800 a day.

But for many weeks the stock has closed under 5 cents; recently at 3 cents.
Make it ~$25 a day, total business.

My guess is that SCO will continue to do nothing -- as its easiest way out.

Wendell Cochran
West Seattle

[ Reply to This | # ]

To the moon!
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 08:19 PM EDT
:-D

[ Reply to This | # ]

My fear is
Authored by: dacii on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 08:40 PM EDT
If they (SCOXQ) do not correct this issue, that all of the stock boards like
yahoo and IV will close those boards. We could see an increase in goofy
individuals coming here and causing some disruption. Hopefully PJ has a few
extra friends in the wings that can step in and moderate her blogs comments if
things get out of hand. I don't feel PJ needs more work, I think she works hard
enough as it is. I am not sure what can be done to address this. Just
something to ponder, or if your like me worry over.

Time will tell.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Job well done!
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 09:59 PM EDT
File false SEC reports... then go bankrupt... then file no reports... No
problem! We're the SEC!

This inspires my confidence in the SEC. Job well done!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Trading in SCO's shares suspended by the SEC
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 10:04 PM EDT
Any particular reason why the companies all start with S and have a second
letter from A to O?

This looks like part of a bigger list.

...Ronny

[ Reply to This | # ]

Weird pattern
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, April 05 2011 @ 10:43 PM EDT
These suspensions are brought to you buy the letter 'S'.

Do they do one letter a week or something?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Shares suspended by the SEC alphaetically?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 01:49 AM EDT
Is this a partial list or have only companies that start with an 'S' been
naughty lately?

[ Reply to This | # ]

What does this mean for my shareholding?
Authored by: Crocodile_Dundee on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 02:10 AM EDT
I have 1 share and dreams of it funding my comfortable retirement.

---
---
That's not a law suit. *THIS* is a law suit!

[ Reply to This | # ]

no appeal?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 03:43 AM EDT
>>> The judge on March 7 gave Novell 14 days to appeal, if they chose
to, and they chose not to. >>>

What would be possible reasons for giving up?

[ Reply to This | # ]

What seems odd to me...
Authored by: jmc on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 04:14 AM EDT
Is that all these highly expensive trustees, advisors, lawyers, accountants
helping them survive the trauma of their self-induced bankruptcy seem to have
missed filing a simple form for 2 years.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO is in a group of peers
Authored by: vb on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 01:29 PM EDT
SCO really belongs in that group. I recognize the first company, Sabratek.

I'll let the SEC speak for themselves...

"The complaint alleges that from the first quarter of 1998 through
the first quarter of 1999, the defendants engaged in a scheme to defraud
and caused Sabratek whose stock was formerly traded on Nasdaq to
make material misstatements to investors and to file false periodic reports
with the commission. "The defendants used fictitious sales of infusion
pumps, inventory parking arrangements, improper revenue recognition, and
billings for consulting services that were not performed to overstate net
sales by 62 percent and operating income by 229 percent," states the
SEC."

Sounds a lot like SCO's ethics.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Slow and weak SEC response, compared to my country
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 05:32 PM EDT
In the my country, the regulatory response to not filing the regular accounting
reports is a lot tougher and swifter:

1. If a publicly traded company is even a few days late with its quarterly
filings, it is automatically put on the dreaded watch list, which implies a
warning symbol on its stock ticker and an increased risk of suspending of
trading. This is an administrative action by the stock exchange with no trial
or hearing.

2. If a publicly traded company is more than about a month late with its
quarterly filings, it is highly likely that the stock exchange will suspend
trading until the filing has been made and published. Again, this is an
administrative action by the stock exchange with no trial, although there is
usually a back and forth private hearing where the company may beg for mercy.

3. If *any* company is seriously late in filing its annual accounting report
with the state, the state will ask bankruptcy court to dissolve the company, and
it generally *will* do so about 15 to 20 months after the filing was due.
Dissolving is like instant Chapter 7 without the niceties, technically, it is
the final post-chapter 7 state of nonexistence. A company can be dissolved even
if it has no debt and piles of cash.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Fraud?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 06:21 PM EDT
Did any of the monthly charges that we got to see on this site include spending
hours towards SEC work? If so - and if SEC did not get anything from SCO ....
Would this be considered unlawful?

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Fraud? - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 07:03 PM EDT
    • You mean? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 07:09 PM EDT
A theorecitcal question
Authored by: Yossarian on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 06:40 PM EDT
I have open shorts on SCO stock.
If I'll decide to cover my shorts (fat chance...) what
options will I have?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Novel and Collections?
Authored by: sonicfrog on Wednesday, April 06 2011 @ 08:30 PM EDT
Is it possible that the transfer of SCO's assets to this
company will give an opportunity to actually collect more
money, as UnXis has more money to and may want this to go
away?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO has to file forTrading in SCO's shares
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 07 2011 @ 04:45 AM EDT
There is nothing else. I do expect that SCO does file against SEC to list its
shares. And file for damages against Novell. Because Novell is the reason why
and had to take the damage.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Appeal
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 07 2011 @ 09:03 AM EDT
Do you suppose that Novell did not appeal because SCO was banking on them
appealing? The appeal would have dragged this out even longer which I suspect is
the goal of all this. Maybe now that there is no appeal, SCO is trying to figure
out what to do next being as this didn't go as planed. To me it kind of looks
like Novell has called there bluff.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )