SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   Technology StocksBLUEPOINT LINUX (BLPT), the RED HAT of CHINA??....


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: naband who wrote (38)3/3/2001 11:05:32 PM
From: naband
   of 58
 
It appears my exuberance of the Spring was misplaced. The China syndrome has certainly faded. Still holding, but $25 seems to be far off. Company has potential to be successful - but margins are tight. What we consider reasonable growth here would be tremendous for China. I'll keep my fingers crossed and check back at year's end. Any other opinions out there?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Rolla Coasta who started this subject9/11/2002 4:49:57 PM
From: SEC-ond-chance
   of 58
 
Bluepoint Linux Software Corp · S-8 · On 12/15/0 · EX-5
SEC File 333-51890 · Accession Number 1058985-0-264

EX-5 · Opinion re: Legality

Shawn F. Hackman, a P.C.
3360 West Sahara Avenue
Suite 200
Las Vegas, NV 89102
(702) 732-2253

Date: December 12th, 2000

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20549

Re: Bluepoint Linux Software Corp. Employee Benefit Plan.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

We have acted as counsel to Bluepoint Linux Software Corp, an Indiana
corporation (the "Company"), in connection with its Registration Statement on
Form S-8 relating to the registration of 400,000 shares of its common stock
(the "Shares"), $0.001 par value per share. The Shares are issuable pursuant
to the Company's Employee Benefit Plan (the "Plan").

In our representation we have examined such documents, corporate records, and
other instruments as we have deemed necessary or appropriate for purposes of
this opinion, including, but not limited to, the Articles of Incorporation
and Bylaws of the Company.

Based upon the foregoing, it is our opinion that the Company is duly organized
and validly existing as a corporation under the laws of the State of Indiana,
and that the Shares, when issued and sold in accordance with the terms of the
Plan, will be validly issued, fully paid, and non-assessable.We hereby consent
to the use of this opinion as an exhibit to the Registration Statement.

Shawn F. Hackman, a P.C.

By:/s/Adam U. Shaikh, Esq.
Adam U. Shaikh, Esq.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Litigation Release 16233/ August 2, 1999

SEC v. Kanakaris Communications, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. CV-S-99-0967-JBR-LRL.

The Commission announced that on August 2, 1999, it filed a complaint seeking permanent injunctions against Kanakaris Communications, Inc. ("KCI"), Alexander Frank Kanakaris ("Kanakaris"), David R. Valenti ("Valenti") and Shawn F. Hackman ("Hackman"), alleging 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 l0b-5 thereunder. The Commission's complaint also seeks disgorgement from Hackman and civil penalties against Kanakaris, Valenti and Hackman. KCI, Kanakaris and Valenti have agreed to settle the action by consenting, without admitting or denying the allegations of the complaint, to be enjoined from future violations of the registration and antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws; Kanakaris and Valenti also have agreed to pay civil money penalties of $25,000 each.

The complaint alleges that from January 1997 through January 1998, Kanakaris and Valenti both officers of KCI, fraudulently sold the securities of KCI and its predecessor company to individuals in several states. In soliciting investments, it is alleged Kanakaris and Valenti made misrepresentations regarding KCI's financial condition and operations. It is also alleged that Kanakaris and Valenti misrepresented to investors that KCI had a joint venture agreement with Microsoft Corporation. Some of these misrepresentations were allegedly also posted on KCI's web site.

In addition, it is alleged that Hackman, a Las Vegas attorney, prepared a false offering memorandum for KCI, sold KCI stock using the offering memorandum, and collected and distributed the proceeds of those sales, retaining a substantial portion of those funds for his own use. It is further alleged that Hackman, without authorization from KCI, prepared and filed a registration statement with the Commission which, among other things, misrepresented the shareholdings of KCI's management and major shareholders, stated that no unregistered offerings of KCI's securities had been made within the previous year and, rather than including audited financial statements, contained a review of KCI's financial statements without obtaining the consent of the accountants who prepared the review.

sec.gov

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: SEC-ond-chance who wrote (40)9/11/2002 4:50:56 PM
From: SEC-ond-chance
   of 58
 
SEC NEWS DIGEST
Issue 2002-176
September 11, 2002

SHAWN HACKMAN SUSPENDED FROM PRACTICING BEFORE THE COMMISSION AS AN ATTORNEY
The Commission has issued an Order of Suspension against Shawn F.Hackman of Las Vegas, Nevada, suspending him forthwith from appearing orpracticing before the Commission based on his disbarment by the SupremeCourt of Nevada. In taking its action against Hackman, the Court foundthat Hackman had misappropriated over $700,000 in client funds at a timewhen he was ostensibly cooperating with bar counsel concerningallegations by other clients that Hackman had misappropriated theirfunds as well.Hackman is currently a defendant in SEC v. Kanakaris Communications,Inc. In that action, the Commission has alleged that Hackman violatedSection 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and....

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (4)


To: SEC-ond-chance who wrote (41)9/12/2002 11:37:10 AM
From: StockDung
   of 58
 
In the Matter of SHAWN F. HACKMAN, ESQ.
Respondent

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Release No. 46478 / September 11, 2002
Administrative Proceeding
File No. 3-10887

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In the Matter of
SHAWN F. HACKMAN, ESQ.
Respondent


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

ORDER OF
SUSPENSION PURSUANT
TO RULE 102(e)(2) OF THE
COMMISSION'S RULES OF PRACTICE


I.

The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") deems it appropriate that an Order of Suspension be issued against Shawn F. Hackman ("Hackman") pursuant to paragraph (2) of Rule 102(e) of the Commission's Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. § 201.102(2)] ("Rule 102(e)").1

II.
FINDINGS

The Commission finds that:

A. Hackman is an attorney and was licensed to practice law in the State of Nevada on October 16, 1996.

B. On August 2, 1999, the Commission filed a complaint (the "Complaint") in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada against Kanakaris Communications, Inc. ("KCI") and others, including Hackman. The Complaint alleges, among other things, that Hackman violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder by: (1) preparing a false offering memorandum for KCI; (2) selling KCI stock using the offering memorandum; (3) collecting and distributing the proceeds of those sales while retaining $333,645 of those funds for his own use; and (4) without authorization from KCI, preparing and filing a materially misleading registration statement with the Commission. The Commission is seeking a permanent injunction, disgorgement and civil penalties against Hackman.

C. On April 13, 2002, the Supreme Court of Nevada barred Hackman from practicing law in that state based on findings that Hackman had misappropriated over $700,000 in client funds at a time when he was ostensibly cooperating with bar counsel concerning allegations by other clients that Hackman had misappropriated their funds as well. In Re Discipline of Shawn F. Hackman (No. 38826).

III.
ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS

Based upon the foregoing, the Commission finds that Hackman has been disbarred from the practice of law within the meaning of Rule 102(e)(2) of the Commission's Rules of Practice. The Commission deems it appropriate and accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that Hackman be forthwith suspended from appearing or practicing before the Commission as an attorney.

By the Commission.

Jonathan G. Katz
Secretary





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Rule 102(e)(2) provides in pertinent part: "Any attorney who has been suspended or disbarred by a court of the United States or of any State … shall be forthwith suspended from appearing or practicing before the Commission. A disbarment … within the meaning of this section shall be deemed to have occurred when the disbarring . . . agency or tribunal enters its judgment or order .…"



sec.gov

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home | Previous Page Modified: 09/12/2002

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: SEC-ond-chance who wrote (41)9/12/2002 3:56:56 PM
From: StockDung
   of 58
 
SEC suspends disbarred Mitton lawyer Hackman

Securities and Exchange Commission
Symbol *SEC


SEC suspends disbarred Mitton lawyer Hackman

2002-09-12 11:19 PT - Street Wire

by Brent Mudry

Las Vegas penny stock lawyer Shawn F. Hackman, whose career highlights include writing bogus share opinion letters for notorious Canadian career fraudster Michael Mitton's H & R Enterprises, has been suspended by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. The SEC suspension, handled by the regulator's Salt Lake City office and announced Wednesday, is based on Mr. Hackman's disbarment by the Supreme Court of Nevada.

Mr. Hackman is the third Las Vegas-linked penny stock attorney in the past 11 months to destroy his career related to dubious penny stock dealings on Howe Street, the centre of dealings for the former Vancouver Stock Exchange. Herbert Jacobi of New York, who helped Mr. Mitton wire illicit proceeds to Panama in the H & R rig job, pleaded guilty last October to buying stolen FBI records for Mafia-linked client Robert Potter. In an unrelated case, Max C. Tanner of Las Vegas was convicted by a federal jury last November of securities fraud conspiracy and money laundering, stemming from his offshore trading through controversial Vancouver brokerage Pacific International Securities in the Maid Aide boiler room penny stock rig job in 1998 and 1999.

While staff with the Nevada State Bar were unable to immediately confirm or comment on Mr. Hackman's plight, records with the Supreme Court of Nevada show the dirty Las Vegas lawyer was ordered disbarred on April 3. Mr. Hackman had been temporarily suspended by the state court on Dec. 4, 2001, on the request of the state bar's Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board.

Mr. Hackman was disbarred for misappropriating more than $700,000 in client funds at a time when he was ostensibly co-operating with state bar counsel regarding other client complaints of misappropriation. (All figures are in U.S. dollars.) "We conclude that the documents before us demonstrate that Hackman poses a substantial threat of serious harm, and that his immediate temporary suspension is warranted," stated the court in its initial order.

Mr. Hackman was a key professional in the H & R debacle. (The Mitton ring's fraudulent OTC Bulletin Board promotion of H & R caused the collapse of a small upstate New York brokerage, Saperston Financial, in September, 1997, and left the clearing house unit of global mutual fund giant Fidelity Management, National Financial Services, with a $9.6-million loss.)

"Hackman was a primary participant in the manipulation scheme and facilitated the manipulation by arranging for the manipulators to reap huge profits from their scheme," stated National Financial lawsuit filed U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in September, 1997, and amended a year later.

The Fidelity unit alleged that Mr. Hackman, who had served as H & R's counsel, prepared and provided false opinion letters to help the Mitton ring clear large issuances of H & R shares in July and August, 1997. "Hackman falsely opined that the shares ... which were newly issued to the manipulators so they could sell them into the manipulated market, were exempt from registration under the United States' federal securities laws and could be issued by a transfer agent without a restrictive legend," stated National Financial.

Barely a month after the last Hackman-assisted share issuance, and with an additional two million H & R subsequently issued to Mr. Mitton's associates, H & R shares peaked and collapsed, taking Saperston, the unfortunate New York brokerage, under with it.

While these H & R fraud allegations date back four or five years, Nevada's bar took no disciplinary action, or at least no serious action, against Mr. Hackman. (Numerous new revelations about the H & R fiasco are expected when the British Columbia Securities Commission starts a hearing on the matter. A scheduling update is set for Dec. 2, with Mr. Mitton and Canaccord Capital broker Brad Scharfe as star local defendants.)

Instead, the state bar tackled Mr. Hackman amid a criminal investigation for misappropriation of client funds several years after H & R. Documents filed in court by the bar itself confirm it had serious concerns about Mr. Hackman dating back to at least August, 1999, 14 months before he met his latest alleged victim, who is now at least $700,000 poorer.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: SEC-ond-chance who wrote (41)9/12/2002 4:12:29 PM
From: StockDung
   of 58
 
RE: Shawn F. Hackman, BLUEPOINT LINUX SOFTWARE CORP, filed this on 12/15/2000.


Shawn F. Hackman, a P.C. 3360 West Sahara Avenue Suite 200
Page 1

non-assessable.We hereby consent to the use of this opinion as an exhibit to the Registration Statement. Shawn F. Hackman, a P.C. By:/s/Adam U. Shaikh, Esq. Adam U. Shaikh, Esq. </TEXT> </DOCUMENT>

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: SEC-ond-chance who wrote (41)9/12/2002 4:14:27 PM
From: StockDung
   of 58
 
ECONNECT, filed this on 08/08/2000.
(subject to the right to designate a different address by notice similarly given): To Betting Nevada: Shawn F. Hackman, Esq. Shawn F. Hackman, P.C. 3360 West Sahara Avenue, Suite 200 Las Vegas, Nevada 89102 To Betting Missouri: Thomas S. Hughes, Page 4

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: StockDung who wrote (45)9/19/2002 1:17:58 AM
From: SEC-ond-chance
   of 58
 
Camera salesman turned blank check company peddler

mascapital.com

mascapital.com

mascapital.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Rolla Coasta who started this subject9/19/2002 1:31:13 AM
From: SEC-ond-chance
   of 58
 
One of the companies he merged with in March is SurgiLight Inc., a Winter Park, Fla., operator of laser-eye centers. He retained more than 372,500 shares of its stock, which was listed for trading on the over-the-counter bulletin board yesterday.

"I’ve been very busy," he says. "It’s exciting. Every deal is different."

Blank-check companies have had a checkered past. Most states outlaw them. In 1992, the SEC tightened regulations on them because many were being used for fraudulent purposes. The SEC and several states required blank-check concerns to place proceeds from a public offering into an escrow account and then, when merging with a going concern, to disclose information on the deal and give stockholders the opportunity to have their funds returned.

For his part, Mr. Tsai says he has run into some "not very reputable" people as he has sought to find partners for his blank-check companies

sec.gov

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: StockDung who wrote (45)1/1/2003 11:14:37 PM
From: SEC-ond-chance
   of 58
 
Launch Tech Co (GEM 8196) Hong Kong ....any plans for a Bluepoint spinoff on the GEM?

Bluepoint BLPT Linux ....at one time they wanted to list on the GEM Global Emerging Market (second board) in Hong Kong.

google.com

Didn't happen..Instead two of the newly appointed directors of BLPT are directors/employees of Launch Tech Co LTD then a private but now a newly formed public company in Hong Kong

216.239.39.100

They are major shareholders
ITEM 4. PURPOSE OF TRANSACTION Xin Liu and Jun Liu acquired the securities of BluePoint Linux Software
Corporation for the purpose of acquiring majority control of the issuer.
Pursuant to a stock purchase agreement, current directors Zhe Kang, Lin Li, and
Yihuo Ye will resign their positions and sever affiliations with the issuer.
Pursuant to Indiana law, the remaining directors are expected to appoint Xin Liu
and Jun Liu to the board of directors to fill the anticipated vacancies until
director elections can be conducted at the annual shareholder meeting. No
extraordinary corporate changes or changes in capitalization and securities
registration are intended at this time.
and a director is Frank Kwai Shing...Also believe it or not Frank Shing is listed as a securities investment representative for Core Pacific-Yamaichi Capital Limited

pr.hksfc.org.hk

Core Pacific-Yamaichi Capital Ltd was the sponsor of the IPO

216.239.39.100

On the GEM Hong Kong Bluepoint doesn't exist but Launch Tech Co does

hkgem.com

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10