% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.


  • jimsutter10 jimsutter10 May 8, 2013 3:09 PM Flag

    July 1st


    What happens to the stock price if they become current the SEC after the lawsuit settles. I have searched far and wide to find another Chinese RTO class action suit that has "settled" before SCEI's final settlement on July 1st. I have not found one. So we really do not know what is going to happen. Many believe they will file and the price will go back to reasonable levels. Due to the fact that Jing is still communicating with shareholders, I would think the odds are good.

    For those of you reading LBCB's post, do not believe him when he says I have other Alias I post under. I have nothing to hide. Over on the ABAT board I posted under an alias for a while because I wanted to avoid detection by the company who I was. That was months ago.

    This topic is deleted.
    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • CHBT became current, probably forced by the SEC. You can see the spike in the 1-year chart. I still think it's a fraud though. Lawsuits probably still ongoing if they have any.

      CEAI had all lawsuits settled recently. Definitive. But they have always reported. Stock didn't react because they are losing too much money. Lawsuit probably wasn't that serious because the stock never suffered a major blow.

      Every case is different it seems. If SCEI becomes current, the stock will go up. There is still some interest here. But a going private offer is what we should put our money on.

      • 2 Replies to realdutch01
      • And, by the way, please accept my condolences on the passing of your father.

      • "Every case is different it seems."

        I'd agree with that. Every one I've reviewed thus far certainly has at least one or two features unique to that particular case.

        One that i found interesting, and which may be the very first "China RTO" case, is Catherine Rand, et al. v. China Energy Savings Technology, Inc., et al., 06-CV-03308 (Southern District New York).

        That one was originally filed in May of 2006. The defendant company seems to have merely disappeared from the record once the SEC began investigating, and the plaintiffs dismissed (without prejudice) in February of 2007.

        Prior to that, counsel for the various defendants had withdrawn, which generally occurs when a client is non-cooperating.

    • "Due to the fact that Jing is still communicating with shareholders..."

      Hunh?!? How can Jing be communicating with shareholders, when the email domain is suspended? Do you have her personal email address?

      (And I thought you said she was no longer replying to you because you had "threatened to sue" them.)

      • 1 Reply to asianvest
      • Yes we have her work e-mail address, which was on the web site when it worked, I sent her an e-mail this morning about the web site being down and she answered tonight telling me that they had some trouble wiring money to the company hosting their site but they have now sorted it out and it should be back and running soon.

        Sentiment: Hold

    • I found one (only one, so far).

      Stream Sicav, Et Al, vs RINO International Corporation, Et Al, CV-10-8695-DDP (VBKx)

      Settlement stipulation filed 09 April 2012, Final Order issued 19 December 2012.

      No periodic filings from the company since their 10Q for 3Q 2010.

0.160.0000(0.00%)Jul 10 3:24 PMEDT