This is a photo of the National Register of Historic Places listing with reference number 7000063
Monday, January 14, 2013
TWO FORMER CORPOATE OFFICERS OF VOLT INFOMATION SCIENCES, INC., CHARGED WITH SECURITIES FRAUD
FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
SEC Charges Volt Information Sciences, Inc. and Two Former Officers with Securities Fraud
The Securities and Exchange Commission yesterday filed civil injunctive complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in connection with improper accounting at Volt Information Sciences, Inc. ("Volt" or the "Company"), a company located in New York, New York.
In its complaint against Jack J. Egan, Jr. Volt’s former Chief Financial Officer, the Commission alleges that Egan participated in a scheme to materially overstate revenue. For Volt’s fourth quarter and fiscal year ended October 28, 2007, Egan signed and filed financial statements reporting $7.55 million of revenue that had not been earned and was not recognizable under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The $7.55 million of improper revenue caused Volt’s net income for its fourth quarter and fiscal year ended October 28, 2007, to be materially overstated. The complaint further alleges that the scheme relied on fabricated paperwork purporting to be a contract selling software to a customer. Egan knew that any sale of the software was impossible because Volt intended to lease the same software to the same customer the following year. Nevertheless, Egan authorized that the $7.55 million in improper revenue be included in the Company’s consolidated income statement for 2007, which were included in Volt’s: (1) 2007 Form 10-K filed with the Commission on January 11, 2008, as amended by Form 10-K/A filed with the Commission on February 25, 2008; and (2) earnings release on Form 8-K furnished to the Commission on December 20, 2007. Egan signed the fraudulent 2007 Form 10-K and subsequent SEC filings that included the same overstatement of revenue. In addition, the complaint alleges that Egan mislead Volt’s external auditors and he signed one or more certifications required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act that were false and misleading.
The Commission’s complaint charges Egan with violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act"); Sections 10(b) and 13(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act"); and Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 13b2-1, 13b2-2, and 13a-14. The complaint further charges Egan with aiding and abetting violations by the Company. The Commission seeks that Egan be permanently enjoined, be ordered to pay a civil money penalty, and be prohibited from acting as an officer or director.
In addition to the complaint against Egan, the Commission filed a settled civil action against Volt and Debra L. Hobbs ("Hobbs"), the former chief financial officer of the Volt subsidiary where the fraud originated. Without admitting or denying the complaint's allegations, Volt agreed to be enjoined from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act , and Sections 10(b),13(a), 13(b)(2)(A), and 13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, 13a-1, and 13a-11. The Company cooperated during the Commission’s investigation and has undertaken significant remediation efforts.
SEC Charges Volt Information Sciences, Inc. and Two Former Officers with Securities Fraud
The Securities and Exchange Commission yesterday filed civil injunctive complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in connection with improper accounting at Volt Information Sciences, Inc. ("Volt" or the "Company"), a company located in New York, New York.
In its complaint against Jack J. Egan, Jr. Volt’s former Chief Financial Officer, the Commission alleges that Egan participated in a scheme to materially overstate revenue. For Volt’s fourth quarter and fiscal year ended October 28, 2007, Egan signed and filed financial statements reporting $7.55 million of revenue that had not been earned and was not recognizable under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The $7.55 million of improper revenue caused Volt’s net income for its fourth quarter and fiscal year ended October 28, 2007, to be materially overstated. The complaint further alleges that the scheme relied on fabricated paperwork purporting to be a contract selling software to a customer. Egan knew that any sale of the software was impossible because Volt intended to lease the same software to the same customer the following year. Nevertheless, Egan authorized that the $7.55 million in improper revenue be included in the Company’s consolidated income statement for 2007, which were included in Volt’s: (1) 2007 Form 10-K filed with the Commission on January 11, 2008, as amended by Form 10-K/A filed with the Commission on February 25, 2008; and (2) earnings release on Form 8-K furnished to the Commission on December 20, 2007. Egan signed the fraudulent 2007 Form 10-K and subsequent SEC filings that included the same overstatement of revenue. In addition, the complaint alleges that Egan mislead Volt’s external auditors and he signed one or more certifications required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act that were false and misleading.
The Commission’s complaint charges Egan with violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act"); Sections 10(b) and 13(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act"); and Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 13b2-1, 13b2-2, and 13a-14. The complaint further charges Egan with aiding and abetting violations by the Company. The Commission seeks that Egan be permanently enjoined, be ordered to pay a civil money penalty, and be prohibited from acting as an officer or director.
In addition to the complaint against Egan, the Commission filed a settled civil action against Volt and Debra L. Hobbs ("Hobbs"), the former chief financial officer of the Volt subsidiary where the fraud originated. Without admitting or denying the complaint's allegations, Volt agreed to be enjoined from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act , and Sections 10(b),13(a), 13(b)(2)(A), and 13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, 13a-1, and 13a-11. The Company cooperated during the Commission’s investigation and has undertaken significant remediation efforts.
Sunday, January 13, 2013
ALLEGED NEW GOLD EXTRACTION PROCESS EXTRACTED FUNDS FROM INVESTORS
FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
The Securities and Exchange Commission today filed fraud charges against a California-based mining company and its CEO who induced hundreds of investors to pour $16 million into a fruitless gold mining venture.
The SEC alleges that Nekekim Corporation and Kenneth Carlton defrauded investors with representations that a special "complex ore" found at Nekekim's mine site in Nevada contained gold deposits worth at least $1.7 billion. Carlton highlighted test results produced by two small labs that used unconventional methods to test the ore for gold, but he withheld from investors other tests conducted by different firms that suggested the Nekekim mine site held little if any gold. The small labs' reliability also had been called into doubt by geologists and a government study. Yet as Nekekim failed to produce any mining revenue, Carlton gave shareholders false hope that the company was close to perfecting the custom method it supposedly needed to extract gold from its special ore.
Carlton agreed to settle the SEC's charges.
According to the SEC's complaint filed in federal court in Fresno, Calif., Nekekim succeeded in attracting investors from 2001 to 2011 in such U.S. states as California, Florida, and New Jersey as well as foreign countries including Canada, Australia, and Singapore. Carlton falsely represented to investors that a "physicist" who in reality had no scientific training helped develop a confidential gold extraction technique licensed by Nekekim. Carlton also promoted a series of other supposedly promising extraction methods in frequent reports to shareholders. In one newsletter, he touted: "A NEW GOLD RECOVERY PROCESS IS SUCCESSFUL." As each of these methods actually failed, Carlton's reports grossly overstated Nekekim's progress toward profitability while prompting shareholders to invest more money in the company.
Carlton, who lives in Clovis, Calif., agreed to a judgment requiring him to pay a $50,000 penalty and prohibiting him from selling securities for Nekekim or managing the company. He also will be prohibited from further violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Nekekim, based in Madera, Calif., agreed to a judgment prohibiting the same violations and requiring disclosure of these sanctions in any offering of securities for the next three years. Carlton and Nekekim neither admitted nor denied the SEC's allegations.
This case was investigated by Thomas Eme and Tracy Davis of the SEC's San Francisco office.
The Securities and Exchange Commission today filed fraud charges against a California-based mining company and its CEO who induced hundreds of investors to pour $16 million into a fruitless gold mining venture.
The SEC alleges that Nekekim Corporation and Kenneth Carlton defrauded investors with representations that a special "complex ore" found at Nekekim's mine site in Nevada contained gold deposits worth at least $1.7 billion. Carlton highlighted test results produced by two small labs that used unconventional methods to test the ore for gold, but he withheld from investors other tests conducted by different firms that suggested the Nekekim mine site held little if any gold. The small labs' reliability also had been called into doubt by geologists and a government study. Yet as Nekekim failed to produce any mining revenue, Carlton gave shareholders false hope that the company was close to perfecting the custom method it supposedly needed to extract gold from its special ore.
Carlton agreed to settle the SEC's charges.
According to the SEC's complaint filed in federal court in Fresno, Calif., Nekekim succeeded in attracting investors from 2001 to 2011 in such U.S. states as California, Florida, and New Jersey as well as foreign countries including Canada, Australia, and Singapore. Carlton falsely represented to investors that a "physicist" who in reality had no scientific training helped develop a confidential gold extraction technique licensed by Nekekim. Carlton also promoted a series of other supposedly promising extraction methods in frequent reports to shareholders. In one newsletter, he touted: "A NEW GOLD RECOVERY PROCESS IS SUCCESSFUL." As each of these methods actually failed, Carlton's reports grossly overstated Nekekim's progress toward profitability while prompting shareholders to invest more money in the company.
Carlton, who lives in Clovis, Calif., agreed to a judgment requiring him to pay a $50,000 penalty and prohibiting him from selling securities for Nekekim or managing the company. He also will be prohibited from further violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Nekekim, based in Madera, Calif., agreed to a judgment prohibiting the same violations and requiring disclosure of these sanctions in any offering of securities for the next three years. Carlton and Nekekim neither admitted nor denied the SEC's allegations.
This case was investigated by Thomas Eme and Tracy Davis of the SEC's San Francisco office.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Subscribe To WALL STREET FRAUDSTERS
Posts
All Comments