About the lawyer and 25/Shareholder to be apart

[Franko10 ™]

Hey,,...

I feel the need to voice my concern over this matter because I feel that it in no way will help us the shareholders at this stage of the game.

Here are some posts from 31 I have already made in regards to the issues and the replies from others.

Franko10 said:

Yeah I heard Dave too,.. But listen this guy is saying he will be paid to sit there,.. it is not like he can do anything else..


I am sure there are enough people out there that will pay the 25 so I guess me saying I wont really wont hurt his feelings any,..

if 5,000 people do it... he gets 125,000 to sit there

if 25,000 people do it,.. he gets 625,000 to sit there.

To me this is another person trying to make some quick cash off of us,.. Largest shareholder base ever so sure why not try to get 25 bucks a head,.. You’ll be rich if all 50,000+ agree to it and not have to worry about you CMKX investment,.. As you already cashed in,..



I still disagree with this Idea
I don't care if Urban was impressed or not,.. I like him,.. But does he not see how this is not being done right?

friscotrader said:

You took the words right out of my mouth man.

UC is a "promoter" I cant tell you how many times I've seen people say how bad a business man he is(the reason he has recently surrounded himself with Mahue, what's the other guys name lol, and the now departed Glenn. He has a good heart & while on the top this sounds like a good plan...........all I see coming out of it is a good old-fashioned class action lawsuit.

Now wouldn't that just slow things down a bit?

Franko10 said:

Absolutely Correct,.. That is all I see too,.. Which is only going to cause the true longs in this grief and problems,.. Let the company handle things themselves.

Another thing,.. I would like to know is if they plan on a class action about NSS<.. They had better have proof before going to court,.. Now if you think there is proof,.. Without a shadow of doubt don't you think the company is using that as a card to play,..

Don't mess with it,.. Leave it alone,.. The company and Iron Bob will handle it,.. I know we are frustrated and tired of waiting but if you mess with it,.. You could spoil it for everyone and ruin the stock play of a lifetime,.. Or at least tie it up for a very long time,.. Not the point in time for these types of talks IMHO

And I truly feel this way,.. I think that this is a bad idea,.. I don't care who supplies DD showing how great this lawyer is .... Bottom line is he is a shareholder as well,.. And if he wants to go for his own benefit,.. Then go,.. But don't do this whole 25 / shareholder thing,..

That is just trying to take advantage to unknowing shareholders.

And that of course is only In My Humble Opinion.

Thank You

[Franko10 ™]

Copy of the CMKX Shareholder's Attorney agreement

www.ahandup.us/copy_of_the_cmkx_shareholder.htm

Copy of the CMKX Shareholder's Attorney agreement

The original agreement will be made available tomorrow

and will be linked to this site!



LIMITED ATTORNEY CONSULTATION AND REPRESENTATION AGREEMENT

S.E.C. VS. CMKM DIAMONDS, INC.--ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

THIS AGREEMENT is made on the 29th of March, 2005, between , hereinafter referred to as the "Client", and The Frizzell Law Firm, 305 South Broadway, Suite 302, Tyler, Smith County, Texas hereinafter referred to as the "Attorney":

In consideration of the mutual promises herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:

I. PURPOSE OF REPRESENTATION

1.01 The Client hereby retains and employs the Attorney to represent such individual or individuals in an administrative proceeding being brought by the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission, referred to hereafter as S.E.C. against CMKM DIAMONDS, INC. referred to hereafter as Company, in a case designated as S.E.C. FILE #3-11858. Client represents to the Attorney that he or she is a current owner of common stock in CMKM DIAMONDS, INC. By this agreement, said Attorney agrees to represent the interests of the Client along with other shareholder Clients in the currently filed proceeding as styled above. This is a limited representation agreement in that said Attorney and/or his associated Attorneys will conclude their representation for purposes of this agreement when a decision is rendered by the Administrative Judge or if the proceeding is disposed of in some other manner.

Client seeks representation in this matter so that his or her interest along with that of other shareholders is recognized by all parties to this proceeding. Specifically, Attorney and any associated counsel, agrees to advocate on behalf of the Client, individually and as a group, with common goals and concerns.


The proceeding being brought by the S.E.C. is an action to seek certain remedies and sanctions against the Company for failing to file certain reports.


Client understands that Client and other shareholders are not a named party to this proceeding. Attorney and any associated Attorneys will be filing a Motion To Intervene in the above referenced action. Although various rules of practice allow for such intervention by interested parties, agreeing to undertake these efforts to intervene does not guarantee the Administrative Judge will grant such motion and allow the Client and other shareholders to intervene. In the event such intervention is denied by the Court, Attorney and any associated Attorneys will persist in advising the Court of the Client’s position by filing amicus briefs (friend of the Court briefs) in any legal issues which may arise in the proceedings. Attorney agrees to attend the hearing in person as permitted by the Court which is presently scheduled for April 25, 2005 in Washington, D.C. This representation includes any appearances required by the Court until this matter is resolved.


II. ATTORNEY'S FEES AND EXPENSES

2.01 In consideration of services rendered and to be rendered by the Attorney, the Client hereby agrees to pay to Attorney a fee of $25.00. This fee is a one time fee and it is a non-refundable fee. There will be no additional fees for representation in this matter. Out of these fees, Attorney will pay all costs associated with representing Client in this matter, including costs of travel, costs of hiring associated counsel, investigative expenses, filing fees, internet expenses, and all administrative expenses such as long distance costs, copies, and postage.

III. EXPLANATION OF FEE ARRANGEMENT

3.01 All parties to this agreement understand that a group of CMKX shareholders led by John Martin of Lindale, Texas retained the above named law firm in 2004 to represent them in any matters relating to their purchase of stock in the Company. When this group of shareholders was advised of the pending regulatory action, an agreement was made by these shareholders to hire legal counsel to represent them in this proceeding because any action by the Court will necessarily have an effect on their stock and their rights as shareholders. John Martin has agreed to pay all Attorney fees and costs of this proceeding that are not covered by the contribution of additional shareholders in the amount of $25.00. The total legal fees for representation in this matter cannot be determined at this time due to lack of information by the Client regarding what legal issues will be involved and what legal work will be necessary to adequately represent the Client. It is also unknown at this time how many additional shareholders will participate in this proceeding. The cost of hiring associated counsel to assist in representing the above named Client will be significant and such hiring will be at the sole discretion of the Attorney. Regardless of the costs involved to John Martin, the fee of $25.00 will be the sole financial responsibility of the above named Client in the instant proceeding.

3.02 Texas State Bar Rule 104 (as amended March 1, 2005) provides guidelines for determining whether an attorney fee is reasonable. If the fees accumulated by the payment of this $25.00 retainer exceeds all reasonable and necessary attorney fees and costs incurred by the shareholder group, all excess funds will be distributed to each client on a pro rata basis.

IV. ASSOCIATION OF OTHER ATTORNEY'S

4.01 The Attorney may, at the sole discretion and expense of the Attorney, associate any other Attorneys in the representation of the aforesaid claims of the Client.

4.02 The Frizzell Law Firm is a general practice law firm with experience in the trial of complicated civil matters and general civil litigation. The representation of the Client in this matter will involve legal expertise in securities law. The Frizzell Law Firm has general experience in corporate law and business formations but is not representing to any party that the firm has a specialty in securities law. The Attorney will hire associate counsel with any required expertise the Attorney deems necessary to adequately represent the above named Client and all other shareholders in this matter. There will be no additional fees payable from the Client above the $25.00 fee for the hiring of additional counsel.

V. CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION

5.01 The Attorney is very mindful of the wishes of the Client for confidentiality in his or her business affairs. In this proceeding, the above named Attorney or associated counsel will be representing to the Court in a legal document that the Client is a current common stock shareholder of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. (CMKX) The Motion to Intervene which will be filed in this case will necessarily include a representation to the Court that this shareholder group owns a certain number of shares of Company stock. Client will be allowed to join this Motion to Intervene by providing the following information.

5.02 Method A. The Client can sign the agreement and include the number of shares owned and the brokerage account that holds such shares. The Client should provide a mailing address and age of the shareholder. The shareholders name and address will be included in an Exhibit “A” attached to the Motion to Intervene. The shareholders respective share ownership will NOT be disclosed in this Exhibit “A”, only the shareholders name will appear. As shareholders join this proceeding, a running total of all the shareholders that comprise this group wishing to intervene will be kept by the Attorney and only the total amount owned by the Owner’s group will be stated in the Court filings. Attorney will keep a copy of this agreement which will contain the information of the total number of shares confidential and will not divulge such information to any parties unless directed to do so by the Court. The Court may wish to see proof of the number of shares as represented by our pleadings, and additional verification may be required.

5.03. Method B. The Attorney has been advised that there may be some Clients who would like to intervene and have their shares considered in this group, but wish to remain anonymous as far as any Court filed documents are concerned. In other words, they wish to be a party but do not want their name to appear on any Exhibit “A”. Attorney will make a separate list on the Exhibit “A” which will provide a shareholder identification number assigned by the Attorney’s office and will represent to the Court that counsel for the Intervenors has proper verification of this individual’s holdings. If a Client chooses to participate by this method, a separate form from this employment agreement will be filled out and submitted to the Attorney which will state the name of the Client, the address of the Client, the Client’s age, the number of shares and how those shares are held. The name will not be included on the Exhibit “A” but the amount of stock will be included in the total of shares represented by this group. No name will be disclosed to any third parties without the consent of the shareholder except under Court order.

I certify and acknowledge that I have had the opportunity to read this Agreement. I further state that I have voluntarily entered into this Agreement fully aware of its terms and conditions.

Signed on this 29th day of March, 2005.

First Name:
Last Name:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Shares Owned (Certs):
Shares Owned (Street Name):
Brokerage Company:
Choose Method: A: B:

[Franko10 ™]

This lawyer needs a make over,.. that is why he is trying to charge us 25$/shareholder,..


There is No Way I would ever even consider this,..

This deal reeks of scam,.. you can't tell me he didn't do the math on this and figure,.. "oh hey I can be a millionaire tommorrow all I need is to get a bunch of anxious investors to pay 25$/ person and then run away,.. or better yet pretend to work while I am golfing,.. because god knows if the lawyers CMKX has can't get this fixed how in the heck am I going to do it,..

I don't bash much guys but I draw the line here and say I want to protect all of ya,.. this reeks scam. IMHO

Please take this as well as the other post I have seen today very serioulsy and weight your options before you do anything if you are considering paying this,.. please!

Thank You

Don't do this later after the wools been pulled over your eyes!

[Franko10 ™]

From John Martin who hired Bill Frizzell

To all fellow shareholders,

I have been reading these boards for the past two days and have been amazed at the number of people against someone standing up for us in the SEC hearing. I would like to address a few items of concern.

In no way is this intervention designed to attack our company. I have been long this stock for over a year. I have read a lot of your posts for that time period and respect many of you. Those of you who have spoken against it, I feel, think it is going to harm your interests and I totally understand your position. This action is merely a way of trying to make sure that the SEC keeps us in mind when they make a decision. Please consider that if indeed the SEC is threatened by a huge naked short, they are going to move swiftly to take us out, and they can, based solely on the filing issues. The company can say, "what about the 70k shareholders your honor?" "Well CMKX, you should have thought about that before you messed up your filings." Then what?

My intention here is not to try to make you change your mind, but to only explain why I have hired Bill Frizzell. No, Bill is not a Securities Lawyer, but he is an incredible trial attorney, and, take it or leave it, an honest one. I know there are other honest attorneys out there, but I don't personally know any like I do Bill. I can also tell you that Bill is one of the most kind individuals I know. I have never known him to cheat anyone. He works hard for the money he makes, and that's probably why he is not incredibly wealthy. Bill is not looking to make a lot of money here. He knew when he started this that there would probably not be more than 1000-1500 investors jump on board. Bill is excited about helping me, as well as others, by trying to protect our interest. Bill is in Washington interviewing attorneys today to take up the slack where he is less knowledgeable. He intends on being totally prepared to make our interests known.

What is my interest? Please compare them to your own. That CMKX continue to exist, and to have time to make the filings right, and to have the opportunity to show the world that they have the goods. That's it! I want to make my money off of the stock I own, not off of some class action lawsuit that makes us less than our investment.

Some have said why would I come into this at the last hour? Because it is the last hour! I have sat in front of my computer for a year hanging on to every prominent poster's words, hoping and praying that they were right. I listened to all the pumpers make predictions only to be let down like the rest of you. I was in a trance waiting for the day for our illustrious management to pull this through. Granted, they still might, and they are illustrious! But they are dealing with the most powerful force on earth, “WALLSTREET”<br>
It has been very disappointing to see the response out there due to the fact that it will take a large shareholder base to have any effect on the decision by the Judge. She must see that we are a force to be reckoned with, otherwise it may end in vain. Sure, if we are made to go private, I think UC will do the right thing and keep us around, and we probably will one day make money, but IMHO I do not think this was the plan. I honestly feel the company has a problem that SHOULD be easily overcome, IF the SEC was not threatened by the problems that were caused by allowing a possible huge naked short problem to exist.

Two more things then I will stop. First, I personally believe the Green Baron feels that this action is of the greatest importance to shareholders, or he would have never supported the idea in the first place. I, along with Bill, explained all that we were going to try and accomplish to Ed. I asked him to please help. When I was done talking, he understood, and agreed that representation was indeed a good idea. I paid him nothing, I promised him nothing. The Green Baron did what they did, because they believe in this company like we all do. Thank you Ed, you did the right thing!!

Secondly, I am not a “big time” shareholder. I have an average number of shares. I do not have a lot of money. But, what I do have a lot of, is heart. I will fight to the end to protect my investment, because it is all that I have for the most part materialistically speaking. I am very wealthy when it comes to family. Four children, and an adoring wife who has put up with me for a year living this dream that you all have been living with me. We longs have got to pull together on this. We need to be represented at this hearing. There is NO agenda here other than standing up and telling the SEC we are watching, and we want to be dealt with fairly. If not, we are going to be a force like you have never dealt with before.

If you disagree I understand and will do my best with the shareholders that have, and will join me. I hold no hard feelings towards anyone because I understand you don't know me, and you really have no reason to trust anyone. I promise that if you will find a little trust, that Bill will work as hard as he possibly can to do his best, and I will be right beside him every step of the way.

Thank you for your time.
Please call me today if you wish. I will be helping again today at the law firm answering phones. All of you who have called so far, thank you for calling and asking the questions that you have. Thank you for placing trust in the effort so far.

John Martin
903-595-1921
[e-mail]

[Franko10 ™]

cmkxdiamond.proboards32.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1112464127

Posts: 13
Amazing Post by Bo on iHub (re: attorney)
« Thread started on: Today at 12:48pm » <br>
Posted by: Bo14172
In reply to: dustybutler1 who wrote msg# 38274
Date:4/2/2005 11:04:32 AM
Post #of 38343

My opinion differs 100%.

I'll add to the discussion only as food for thought. People are going to do whatever they want to do anyway, but in this issue adding my .02 may help some because litigation management has been part of my job for 18 years.

When deciding on counsel whether it be plaintiff representation or defense representation chosing the right counsel is vital. Matters like the one certain CMKX shareholders are talking about are matters outside of the the direct plaintiff (SEC) vs defendant (CMKX) action.

In my humble opinion, regarding the specific contentions of the SEC's suit, they could well have a prima facie case. A prima facie case is a latin a expression which means presenting the minimum threshold amount of evidence or proof sufficient for the accuser or plaintiff to win the case if there were no defenses or additional evidence presented by the defendant.

In CMKX's last pr, they readily admitted their mistake in not filing. Thus other than them saying "I'm sorry, we goofed", they have shown no affirmative defense or weighted evidence to defend this action against them.

Of course it will be up to the judge to determine if this is such a case, but I see them offering no defense other than showing the good faith and vast contrast in current leadership versus leadership prior to Mr. Meheu. Because this action focuses around the deficiencies during a time period of prior leadership, that is where I hope the punishment which WILL BE HANDED DOWN fall, and not affect the company's ability to trade or continue under current leadership.

As for shareholders seeking representation, would you go to a brake specialist to fix your transmission? Would you go to an orthopedic surgeon to address serious issues involving cancer or high blood pressure? Of course you wouldn't.

Even though it seems obvious for those of us involved in litigation in our jobs, if as a shareholder (or group of shareholders) you chose to seek representation, then doesn't it make sense to interview and hire a top attorney or law firm specializing in shareholder representation or securities law?

I simply believe it is too early for any such action.

I'm certainly not on board with sending an attorney I have never met or know anything about their practice to speak for me.
Do you know how many attorney's I have seen lose in court filings or oral arguements at a hearing simply because they didn't know what to do in terms of proper filings or lack of knowledge in the applicable law when presenting their arguements?? The answer is more than you realize. And these are attorneys who claim that certain type of case as their speciality. How much more deficient would a common trial lawyer be in front of any Federal court trying to argue securities law?? They will do endless research only to likely be very off-point because they are not up on the true and proper protocol and procedures, and certainly not up to date in the applicable court cases which determines the strength of any arguement.

Next, regarding the intention of representation itself. The SEC filed a matter showing CMKX delinquent in their filings. CMKX admits this is true. No where, anywhere have I seen any counter-claim, affirmative defense or New Matter filed by CMKX suggesting any NSS issue or any problems with the DTC or SEC itself. So....because this is simply a matter regarding the filings, we as shareholders have no interjection that the judge will deem relevant in this case. She is fully aware of the large shareholder base. Involvement of a non-experienced attorney into this hearing will simply have no role in the evidence or hearing.

Legal representation will be needed for shareholders if 2 scenerios arise:

1) It is somehow revealed in the wake of the Dateline story of April 10th that CMKX HAS PROOF of illegal trading practices against the MM's and other authorities. Then yes, we shareholders should absolutely pick the best team of securities attorney's and with 50,000 of us behind them, let's go kick some serious ass starting with the MM's and working from there.

or

2) Against UC and company directly if this turns even uglier than it already is. If there is further investigation beyond these issues by the SEC inquiring where all the money went and we find out it went to secret accounts, trusts, mansions and race car teams, with only a small fraction going to simply drill 2 inch holes just to keep the promotion going and nothing more...then the majority of shareholders are simply going to have to wake up and smell the kimberlite and take action against those responsible if our investments are lost.

To blindly chose your counsel without knowing who they are is a mistake. As it pertains to the issues of this hearing, such representation will simply have no relevance.

Bo

[Franko10 ™]

By: stervc
02 Apr 2005, 10:40 AM EST
Msg. 187658 of 187703
(This msg. is a reply to 187587 by lana41092.)
Jump to msg. #
Lana41092 (& ALL), with all due respect...

Trust me enough to know that I have no ego problems and I would love to be wrong in how I feel. I hope and would love nothing more than for all of you to tell me I told you so. That would be one time that I would enjoy feeling stupid.

But you must consider… What if I am right? Time is of the essence and that is what people are not seeing. If you wait until you think you will need a lawyer, it will be too late. I am trying to help people to quickly understand and position them to get all the facts as soon as possible to make a decision. Some people are making a decision based upon what they think they know. I challenge all to continue seeking the facts about this matter and I will help them so that they can pass logical deduction on their direction.

Bill Frizzel will be coming into Paltalk tomorrow, Sunday at 08:00 PM CST, to answer any and all questions. He is talking to more than one or two people as you mentioned what you thought he was not doing. That’s not how it was initially, but that's why I recommended that we get this out to the masses in Paltalk and the message boards to get more of people's thoughts involved, good and/or bad.

Imagine if it was you who had started all of this. Now imagine you calling me with your lawyer stating your reasons why you are doing such. I would do and recommend the same for you as I am doing for John Martin. Why Because I think that it will help the cause for us to help the company in a way that the company might “not” be able to help them selves. At least we should be in position to see if such is the case.

This is just as new to me as it is to you. I did not start this nor can I stop this. I thank them for telling me about this because they could have just remained quiet and we just heard about it after the fact.

I will be open-minded to consider both sides of the spectrum, not just one. I just think that it might be better to "over-react" for being immediately prepared than to "under-react" and fall flat on our faces, with our hands tied behind our backs.

By the time you and many others think that we might need legal representation for whatever reason, you will not be able to get a hearing especially to include this "Allstar" cast of the SEC that will be there in attendance.

This is what I call... "Capturing the Moment!"

Lana, just because you, Bellingus, Varok, Willy, Easyanswers, Faith4More, Stormcrow, and many others don’t agree with me does not mean that all of you are correct in your thoughts. I can name a list of other well known individuals that do agree. Well, we all have something in common; we all have been right before and we all have been wrong before too!

I am asking that all of you don’t allow this to split us apart. I respect how everyone feel and I never said that I ever had a problem with some who disagreed with me. It was others who felt such way. None of us started this nor can any of us stop this. I just hope you gather “all” of the facts before you make your final decision.

PS-I am having a hard time posting still because of the RB problems. There is more to your post that I will comment on when I return. I am planning on being around for the majority of the day today to hang out in here with all of you. I miss being in here. Today, I have time!!!! Still, I have much love for all of you! No matter what, keep hanging tough and I thank all of you for sharing your thoughts! Today is going to be a fun day!!! I love debating!!! (Not arguing!)

All is well!
www.sterlingsclass.com/
;-)
By: stervc
02 Apr 2005, 10:40 AM EST
Msg. 187658 of 187703
(This msg. is a reply to 187587 by lana41092.)
Jump to msg. #
Lana41092 (& ALL), with all due respect...

Trust me enough to know that I have no ego problems and I would love to be wrong in how I feel. I hope and would love nothing more than for all of you to tell me I told you so. That would be one time that I would enjoy feeling stupid.

But you must consider… What if I am right? Time is of the essence and that is what people are not seeing. If you wait until you think you will need a lawyer, it will be too late. I am trying to help people to quickly understand and position them to get all the facts as soon as possible to make a decision. Some people are making a decision based upon what they think they know. I challenge all to continue seeking the facts about this matter and I will help them so that they can pass logical deduction on their direction.

Bill Frizzel will be coming into Paltalk tomorrow, Sunday at 08:00 PM CST, to answer any and all questions. He is talking to more than one or two people as you mentioned what you thought he was not doing. That’s not how it was initially, but that's why I recommended that we get this out to the masses in Paltalk and the message boards to get more of people's thoughts involved, good and/or bad.

Imagine if it was you who had started all of this. Now imagine you calling me with your lawyer stating your reasons why you are doing such. I would do and recommend the same for you as I am doing for John Martin. Why Because I think that it will help the cause for us to help the company in a way that the company might “not” be able to help them selves. At least we should be in position to see if such is the case.

This is just as new to me as it is to you. I did not start this nor can I stop this. I thank them for telling me about this because they could have just remained quiet and we just heard about it after the fact.

I will be open-minded to consider both sides of the spectrum, not just one. I just think that it might be better to "over-react" for being immediately prepared than to "under-react" and fall flat on our faces, with our hands tied behind our backs.

By the time you and many others think that we might need legal representation for whatever reason, you will not be able to get a hearing especially to include this "Allstar" cast of the SEC that will be there in attendance.

This is what I call... "Capturing the Moment!"

Lana, just because you, Bellingus, Varok, Willy, Easyanswers, Faith4More, Stormcrow, and many others don’t agree with me does not mean that all of you are correct in your thoughts. I can name a list of other well known individuals that do agree. Well, we all have something in common; we all have been right before and we all have been wrong before too!

I am asking that all of you don’t allow this to split us apart. I respect how everyone feel and I never said that I ever had a problem with some who disagreed with me. It was others who felt such way. None of us started this nor can any of us stop this. I just hope you gather “all” of the facts before you make your final decision.

PS-I am having a hard time posting still because of the RB problems. There is more to your post that I will comment on when I return. I am planning on being around for the majority of the day today to hang out in here with all of you. I miss being in here. Today, I have time!!!! Still, I have much love for all of you! No matter what, keep hanging tough and I thank all of you for sharing your thoughts! Today is going to be a fun day!!! I love debating!!! (Not arguing!)

All is well!
www.sterlingsclass.com/
;-)
Sterling

[Designer]

well this lawyer has not even been allowed by the courts- so he may not even get through the doors - he will be sitting in the back collecting everyones money - he probably wouldn't even say a word and not refund peoples money - yes its a good idea but the sec is actually there for the shareholders because its cmkx that has to prove their worth and credibility to the world..... cmkx been hiding a lot - we can't find a lot of fact and proof what the company actually has.... everyone slandering the sec when they are the organization trying to make the market work smoothy for investors... the sec may not have a lot of enforcement but cmkx has not shown to the shareholders anything worth what they say .... the sec is for better protection against cmkx trying to cover up and hold back the real story not the crap pumpers sprout out there



think about it - people bashing the sec for trying to better the market and make sure your investment is not fraudulent...... sure lets just kill the market - then you got useless fracking shares in your account that is meaningless and they is what the sec is trying to prevent................................

so if this person wants the lawyer then he should front the money for himself because he will get a percentage from the lawyers probably while the rest get squat --- really what will the shareholders get out from this guy... its not like its a cash settlement case and he doesn't follow everyones veiws.... he jumping on the cmkx band wagon just to try claim to fame... give me a break because the sec is hopefully going make sure cmkx is real or we find out the uc is a moron scammer that pulled the wool over all of us