You are on page 1of 10

Case 1:12-cv-03298-TCB Document 16 Filed 01/21/13 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. REVOLUTIONS MEDICAL CORP. and RONDALD L. WHEET, Defendants. Civil Action No. 1:12-CV-03298TCB

JOINT AMENDED ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS REVOLUTIONS MEDICAL CORP. AND RONDALD L. WHEET TO COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER RELIEF Defendants Revolution Medical Corp. (RCMP) and Rondald L. Wheet (RCMP and Wheet are jointly referred to as Defendants), by and through their attorneys, respectfully submit this Amended Answer in response to the Complaint (Complaint) of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). OVERVIEW 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Denied. Denied. Denied. Denied. Paragraph 5 is omitted.

Case 1:12-cv-03298-TCB Document 16 Filed 01/21/13 Page 2 of 10

6.

Denied. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

7.

Defendants state that the first sentence of paragraph 7 is a description

of the statutory basis for the SECs statutory authority to which no response is required. 8. Defendants admit that this Court has jurisdiction over this action, but

otherwise deny that Defendants have violated any of the referenced statutes, rules, or laws. 9. Defendants deny that they have engaged in the alleged transactions,

acts, practices and courses of business alleged in the Complaint, and, therefore, deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 9. 10. Defendants deny that they have engaged in the alleged transactions,

acts, practices and courses of business alleged in the Complaint, and, therefore, deny the remaining allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 10. Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding the allegation in the second sentence of this paragraph and, therefore, deny that allegation.

Case 1:12-cv-03298-TCB Document 16 Filed 01/21/13 Page 3 of 10

DEFENDANTS 11. Defendants admit the allegations contained in the first and last

sentences of paragraph 11. Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding the allegations in the second and third sentences of this paragraph and, therefore, deny those allegations. 12. Admitted. FACTS BACKGROUND 13. Defendants admit the first sentence of paragraph 13. Defendants

further admit that one of RCMPs products is a medical safety syringe, based on a retractable needle design but otherwise deny the allegations in the second sentence. 14. 15. 16. Admitted. Admitted. Defendants admit the first sentence of paragraph 16 but otherwise

deny the allegations in this paragraph. 17. Defendants state that the referenced agreement speaks for itself and

deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 18. Denied.

Case 1:12-cv-03298-TCB Document 16 Filed 01/21/13 Page 4 of 10

RMCP AND WHEET ISSUE FRAUDULENT PRESS RELEASES1 19. Defendants deny the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 19.

Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding the allegation in the second sentence of this paragraph and, therefore, deny that allegation. 20. 21. Denied. Defendants state that the referenced press releases speak for

themselves and deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 22. 23. 24. Denied. Denied. Defendants state that the referenced press releases speak for

themselves and deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 25. 26. 27. 28. Denied. Denied. Denied. Denied.

This Answer uses the headings from the Complaint merely for the sake of convenience, and Defendants make no admission through the use of these headings.

Case 1:12-cv-03298-TCB Document 16 Filed 01/21/13 Page 5 of 10

29.

Defendants deny the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 29.

Defendants further state that the referenced September 10, 2010 press release speaks for itself and deny any allegations inconsistent therewith. 30. 31. 32. Denied. Denied. Defendants deny the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 32.

Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief regarding the allegation in the second sentence of this paragraph and, therefore, deny that allegation. 33. Denied. COUNT I FRAUD Violations of Section 17(a)(1) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. 77q(a)(1)] 34. Defendants incorporate by reference as if stated herein their answers

to paragraphs 1-33 of the Complaint. 35. 36. 37. Denied. Denied. Denied.

Case 1:12-cv-03298-TCB Document 16 Filed 01/21/13 Page 6 of 10

COUNT II FRAUD Violations of Section 17(a)(2) and (a)(3) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. 77q(a)(2) and 77q(a)(3)] 38. Defendants incorporate by reference as if stated herein their answers

to paragraphs 1-33 of the Complaint. 39. 40. Denied. Denied. COUNT III FRAUD Violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 78j(b)] and Rules 10b-5(a), (b) and (c) thereunder [17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5(a), (b) and (c)] 41. Defendants incorporate by reference as if stated herein their answers

to paragraphs 1-33 of the Complaint. 42. 43. 44. Denied. Denied. Denied. COUNT IV AIDING AND ABETTING FRAUD Aiding and Abetting Violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 78j(b)] and Rules 10b-5(a), (b) and (c) thereunder [17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5(a), (b) and (c)] 45. Defendants incorporate by reference as if stated herein their answers

to paragraphs 1-33 of the Complaint. 46. Denied.

Case 1:12-cv-03298-TCB Document 16 Filed 01/21/13 Page 7 of 10

47. 48. 49.

Denied. Denied. Denied. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

The remainder of the Complaint constitutes a prayer for relief, which requires no response. To the extent the remainder of the Complaint requires a response, Defendants deny that the SEC is entitled to any relief whatsoever. GENERAL DENIAL All allegations matters or things contained in the Complaint which have not been specifically admitted herein are denied by Defendants. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Having responded to the specific allegations of the Complaint, Defendants assert the following affirmative defenses. FIRST DEFENSE The Complaint fails to state a claim against Defendants upon which relief may be granted. SECOND DEFENSE The Complaint fails to comply with F.R.C.P. 9(b).

Case 1:12-cv-03298-TCB Document 16 Filed 01/21/13 Page 8 of 10

THIRD DEFENSE The SECs claims against Defendants are barred, in whole or in part, due to Defendants good faith reliance on one or more applicable statutes or rules. FOURTH DEFENSE Any projections or statements relating to future events announced by any Defendants were made in good faith and had a reasonable basis and are, therefore, not actionable. FIFTH DEFENSE Defendants were under no duty to disclose some or all of the matters that the SEC claims constituted material omissions. OTHER DEFENSES These defenses are based on the knowledge and information currently possessed by Defendants. Defendants reserve the right to supplement or add additional defenses that they may discover throughout the course of this case. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Defendants hereby demand a jury trial for all issues so triable. WHEREFORE, having fully answered the Complaint, Defendants respectfully request that this Court dismiss the SECs Complaint in its entirety and award Defendants their attorneys fees and costs for defending this lawsuit and such other and further relief as the Court may deem appropriate.

Case 1:12-cv-03298-TCB Document 16 Filed 01/21/13 Page 9 of 10

Dated: January 21, 2013

Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ Frank A. Lightmas, Jr. Frank A. Lightmas, Jr. Georgia Bar No. 452325 Lightmas & Delk Suite 1150, The Peachtree 1355 Peachtree St., N.E. Atlanta, GA 30309 (404) 876-333 (Telephone) (404) 876-3338 (Facsimile) franklightmas@mindspring.com Attorneys for Defendants Revolutions Medical Corp. and Rondald L. Wheet

Case 1:12-cv-03298-TCB Document 16 Filed 01/21/13 Page 10 of 10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on January 21, 2013, I electronically filed this document with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which will automatically send email notification of such filing to the following attorneys of record: Paul T. Kim Senior Trial Counsel Mr. Graham Loomis Regional Trial Counsel Monifa F. Wright Investigative Attorney U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 950 East Paces Ferry Road, N.E., Suite 900 Atlanta, GA 30326 Counsel for Plaintiff /s/ Frank A. Lightmas, Jr. Frank A. Lightmas, Jr. Georgia Bar No. 452325 Lightmas & Delk Suite 1150, The Peachtree 1355 Peachtree St., N.E. Atlanta, GA 30309 (404) 876-333 (Telephone) (404) 876-3338 (Facsimile) franklightmas@mindspring.com Attorneys for Defendants Revolutions Medical Corp. and Rondald L. Wheet

10