You can help us put a stop to online scams before they grow too big and end up ruining thousands of lives. A scam is a scam, doesn’t matter if it’s big or small. Now that this is out of the way, let’s get started with the review.
There was a case filed by the SEC against this famous entrepreneur, Solomon RC Ali. The investigation by the SEC revealed him to be a fraudster. To crack all the points of this investigation we need to delve into the story of the case. Firstly, we need to know about the background of Solomon RC Ali.
We look at 34 different data points when analyzing and rating online money-earning opportunities. Once the research on these data points is submitted, expert contributors reach out to the company’s customers and associates to get more insight into their operation. Finally, all the collected information is presented in the form of this expert review.
All the data is extracted from publicly available information and the sources are given in the transparency section at the bottom of every report.
These reports are made possible by the collective efforts of contributors like you. If you would like to become a contributor then contact us here.
Solomon RC Ali: A Brief Overview
What I found about the background of Solomon RC Ali, who is also known by the name of Richard M. Carter was that he is a self-made millionaire & entrepreneur who set up the Solomon RC Ali Corporation, which offered business & fiscal advisory services to privately held and publicly traded firms regarding the public markets and mergers and acquisitions.
He has worked as a security banker, a financier, the founder of a private equity firm, and a consultant to business owners. Over 140 mergers and acquisitions were individually managed by him and accomplished over his professional tenure.
But here the question arises is that is all these favorable terms about Solomon RC Ali are really true or not. Because he also used his fake PRs to promote his entrepreneurship. Moving further in my ocean of words you will detect it right as many lawsuits are filed against him & we will discuss it.
Well, to know more about him you may follow the mentioned links that also include his social links:
- https://solomonrcali.info/
- https://www.linkedin.com/in/solomonrcali/
- https://www.facebook.com/solomon.ali.10485/
Solomon RC Ali: SEC Allegations against him
A Charlotte, North Carolina-based microcap public company, its CEO, and other people have been accused by the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with an alleged plot to deceive investors.
The charges against REVO and Ali include contravening antifraud and reporting sections of federal securities laws, according to the SEC’s complaint, which was submitted in a federal court in Atlanta, Georgia.
According to the complaint, REVO carried out transactions with people who had close links to Ali but were not publicly revealed under Ali’s command. The corporation also misrepresented these transactions in news releases and other public filings with the SEC, which included misleading and inaccurate representations.
In addition, the SEC’s lawsuit claims that Nicole C. Singletary and Rainco Industries, Inc., two people with close ties to Ali, helped to facilitate the fraud.
It further claims that the federal securities laws were broken by Solomon RC Ali, Rainco, Singletary, and an Atlanta lawyer by the name of Earnest H. (Woody) DeLong, Jr. Another microcap public business named Universal Bioenergy, Inc. (UBRG), which is also named in the complaint, is accused of antifraud and reporting violations.
REVO, Rainco, Singletary, and DeLong agreed on a deal to settle the lawsuit in response to the SEC’s accusations. Without admitting or disputing the claims, the defendants in these agreements agree to the court’s verdicts in full. Moreover, each defendant in the settlement has agreed to fork up $25,000 in civil fines.
Further provisions of the settlements include permanent injunctions against future violations of particular provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as well as associated rules.
A five-year penny stock ban will apply to Rainco and Singletary, and Singletary will also be prohibited from acting as an officer or director for five years.
Additionally, DeLong has agreed to long-term injunctions pertaining to Exchange Act Sections 13(d) and 16(a), Rules 13d-1 and 16a-3. Moreover, he will be subject to a five-year officer and director limit as well as a restriction on penny stocks.
In addition, DeLong consented to a court order suspending his ability to represent clients before the SEC and appear in court. This order is still awaiting court confirmation.
Furthermore, due to these regulations, the SEC has also filed administrative charges against REVO and UBRG for allegedly failing to meet the reporting obligations under Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Without acknowledging or disputing the conclusions, REVO has agreed to an administrative ruling that revokes its securities registrations. An administrative law judge will hear the UBRG case and issue a preliminary determination regarding the accusations and any required corrective actions.
Lucy Graetz of the Atlanta Regional Office of the SEC investigated these issues, working in tandem with the Microcap Fraud Task Force of the Enforcement Division under the direction of Natalie Brunson and Aaron Lipson. H. B. Roback and Graham Loomis are serving as the case’s lead attorneys. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)’s cooperation in this matter has been recognized by the SEC.
What do you understand about Revolutionary Concepts?
Solomon Ali, President and Director of Revolutionary Concepts Inc. (REVO), strategically aided the business in securing the only licensee Eyetalk 365 LLC for its proprietary mobile video communication and security alarm technology.
Eyetalk 365, the sole licensee, has licensed its technology to numerous businesses, including Axis, CPI, Sky Bell, and RING (owned by Amazon), among many others.
The patented technique is employed in today’s smart homes and uses two-way audio/video communication via devices that are activated by motion sensors, sending the signal to a smart device such as a smartphone, computer, panel, iPad, or other smart device.
What was the reaction of Solomon RC Ali against this Lawsuit?
President of Revolutionary Concepts Inc. (REVO) and entrepreneurial millionaire Solomon RC Ali planned to sue the U.S. Securities And Exchange Commission (SEC) for defamation, violating his civil rights, and engaging in discriminatory behavior against him because he is African American in a $1.3 billion lawsuit. He claims that the SEC’s actions cost his companies tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue.
As I mentioned earlier, Solomon RC Ali and REVO are accused of breaking several federal securities laws, according to a civil complaint (lawsuit) filed by the SEC in April 2018.
The charges in the complaint are rejected by Solomon RC Ali as being untrue, unreliable, and deceptive. Solomon RC Ali claims the complaint brought against him was unfounded and without substance, and the SEC hasn’t offered any evidence to back up their claims. 
Despite the SEC’s offer to settle the case on certain hidden terms, Ali claimed that he made the decision to defend his good name, reputation, and character instead. He chose to do this by claiming his rights under the U.S. Constitution, having his case tried by a jury, and having it settled in court.
According to Ali, the SEC has violated his civil and constitutional rights by accusing him of being a racist and harassing him while using ambush investigative techniques, excessive pressure, and harassment.
Repeated acts of physical assault against African Americans by racist police officers as well as other racist parties embedded within different organizations and governmental bodies that they were all forced to deal with and who carry their own biases are part of systemic discrimination against African Americans that continues to deny them in the United States their fundamental rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
The African-American community needs to accumulate riches if it wants to maintain influence in the United States, according to Solomon RC Ali, an acclaimed author and frequent media participant. He saw systemic racism as the fundamental reason for the problem of assault by police against African Americans by prohibiting them from achieving financial success.
Solomon RC Ali claimed that the SEC is conducting a racist “witch hunt,” and that the civil complaint and partial motion for summary judgment were filed by the SEC.
It contained multiple other stated false statements, fraudulent claims, inaccuracies, and disputed facts in an erroneous attempt to falsely accuse and defame him and violate his civil and constitutional rights in an effort to increase the number and track record of prosecuted cases. It is only possible to label this as institutional racism.
In the early stages of this lawsuit, Solomon RC Ali was convinced that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had taken an aggressive and racially prejudiced stance toward him.
This opinion was formed as a result of the fact that he had to pay astronomical legal bills while defending himself against an SEC civil complaint. Due to the substantial financial burden, the other two defendants in the SEC’s lawsuit expressed a desire to reach a settlement with the SEC. Solomon RC Ali was required to authorize a Tolling Agreement as part of the settlement.
By extending the five-year period of restrictions in this case, this deal effectively gave the SEC more time to file a lawsuit against him. Solomon RC Ali believed that because he had little choice, he had effectively been forced to sign the contract.
The Tolling Agreement was required to be signed by all parties, the SEC told all defendants. They stipulated that the matter would move forward to trial if any party refused to sign, as the SEC wouldn’t participate in negotiations for settlement with any of them.
Solomon RC Ali vehemently opposed executing the Tolling Agreement and refused to participate in any agreements with the other defendants. During the signing of the deal, he claimed that the SEC had put him under severe duress, intimidation, and force.
Moreover, Ali’s two co-defendants supported his claims by submitting affidavits or declarations to the U.S. District Court in Atlanta, proving that Solomon RC Ali was in fact coerced by the SEC into signing the Tolling Agreement against his will.
Get Justice Suspicious
Conclusion
In the end, this case demonstrates the SEC’s actions to address suspected securities law breaches relating to Solomon RC Ali firms and emphasizes the regulatory steps taken against the people involved in the allegedly fraudulent operations.
You may follow the following links to learn more about Solomon RC Ali:
- https://patch.com/california/los-angeles/solomon-rc-ali-plans-file-1-3-billion-lawsuit-against-sec
- http://www.emailwire.com/release/1113972-Solomon-RC-Ali-Plans-to-File-13-Billion-Lawsuit-Against-SEC-for-Racism-and-Defamation.html#
- https://casetext.com/case/us-sec-exch-commn-v-ali/case-details
- https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=114775560
