COMMERCIAL CONCEPTS INC CMEC (last ticker on record)
CIK 1014618Its SEC filings (opens in a new tab)
- Went dark (not a red flag)
These figures describe clients, not conduct. A lawyer or firm can serve many companies that later had trouble for reasons that have nothing to do with their work, and nothing here says any lawyer or firm did anything wrong.
- Red flags
- 0
- None on record
- Largest fall in its shares
- —
- None of 95% on record
- Law firms
- 5
- Linked to 5 or more companies
- Lawyers
- 5
- Linked to 5 or more companies
What happened
- SEC action against a company that stopped filingSEC order (opens in a new tab)
- SEC action against a company that stopped filingSEC order (opens in a new tab)
An SEC release can name a company’s officer, or its stock as what a scheme sold or moved, so the company may be the victim. Each link goes to what to read.
Law firms
The ratios are about all the companies linked to each one, this one included: how many had that outcome, as a multiple of what comparable companies show. 1.00 means no more than expected.
- Sonfield & SonfieldFirst linked Aug 2002 · Named in a filing · 35 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.16× · Went dark 2.62× · 95% wipeout 0.90×
- Sichenzia Ross Ference LLPFirst linked May 2001 · Named in a filing · 1,005 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.27× · Went dark 1.62× · 95% wipeout 1.26×
- RAY, QUINNEY & NEBEKERFirst linked Sep 2000 · Named in a filing · 22 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 2.04× · Went dark 1.33× · 95% wipeout 1.74×
- Jenkens & GilchristFirst linked Jun 2001 · Text search only · 279 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.12× · Went dark 0.71× · 95% wipeout 1.11×
- Grushko & MittmanFirst linked Jan 2001 · Text search only · 103 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.19× · Went dark 2.53× · 95% wipeout 1.25×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sonfield & Sonfield | Aug 2002 | Named in a filing | 35 | 1.16 | 2.62 | 0.90 |
| Sichenzia Ross Ference LLP | May 2001 | Named in a filing | 1,005 | 1.27 | 1.62 | 1.26 |
| RAY, QUINNEY & NEBEKER | Sep 2000 | Named in a filing | 22 | 2.04 | 1.33 | 1.74 |
| Jenkens & Gilchrist | Jun 2001 | Text search only | 279 | 1.12 | 0.71 | 1.11 |
| Grushko & Mittman | Jan 2001 | Text search only | 103 | 1.19 | 2.53 | 1.25 |
Lawyers
The ratios are about all the companies linked to each one, this one included: how many had that outcome, as a multiple of what comparable companies show. 1.00 means no more than expected.
- Robert L. Sonfield Jr.Sonfield & SonfieldFirst linked Aug 2002 · Named in a filing · 35 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.15× · Went dark 2.65× · 95% wipeout 0.92×
- Gregory SichenziaSichenzia Ross Ference LLPFirst linked Jun 2001 · Named in a filing · 267 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.06× · Went dark 1.46× · 95% wipeout 1.24×
- Thomas A. RoseSichenzia Ross Ference LLPFirst linked May 2001 · Named in a filing · 107 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.52× · Went dark 1.67× · 95% wipeout 1.31×
- Gregory E. LindleyHolland & HartFirst linked Sep 2000 · Named in a filing · 8 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 0.00× · Went dark 1.47× · 95% wipeout 0.00×
- Christopher S. AugusteKramer Levin NaftalisFirst linked Jun 2001 · Text search only · 90 linked companiesSEC/DOJ scrutiny 1.83× · Went dark 1.24× · 95% wipeout 1.42×
| Name | First linked | How it is known | Linked companies | SEC/DOJ scrutiny | Went dark | 95% wipeout |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Robert L. Sonfield Jr.Sonfield & Sonfield | Aug 2002 | Named in a filing | 35 | 1.15 | 2.65 | 0.92 |
| Gregory SichenziaSichenzia Ross Ference LLP | Jun 2001 | Named in a filing | 267 | 1.06 | 1.46 | 1.24 |
| Thomas A. RoseSichenzia Ross Ference LLP | May 2001 | Named in a filing | 107 | 1.52 | 1.67 | 1.31 |
| Gregory E. LindleyHolland & Hart | Sep 2000 | Named in a filing | 8 | 0.00 | 1.47 | 0.00 |
| Christopher S. AugusteKramer Levin Naftalis | Jun 2001 | Text search only | 90 | 1.83 | 1.24 | 1.42 |