CMKX Owners Group

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 5/26/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 15:32:17 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, May 26, 2005

I have been receiving quite a bit of very important information about the company and short selling of CMKX stock since this group has been formed. John and I were not involved in this stock during its early years. As I do my investigation on your behalf, I often see names and companies that I do not recognize and I would appreciate any input you can provide me on the relationship between these people and companies and CMKX.

When most lawyers accept employment in a case, the first meeting usually allows the lawyer the opportunity to learn the important facts about the case that are known to the client. As your Attorney, I have not been able to do this with most of you. I feel sure there is valuable information that you possess which would be helpful to me.

We have recently created an email address for the purpose of receiving information from whatever source relative to the company and most importantly naked shorting. All information received through this site will be treated as confidential. The email address is [e-mail] .

From time to time, I would like to inquire of this group about certain individuals and companies. You should not assume anything from my request for information about any particular person or company. I am only seeking to gain additional information as we proceed. Information offered should be primarily the person or company’s connection to CMKX.

If you should have information you would like to contribute, please do the following. When you send the information, please type the name of the person or company on the subject line. This will help us as we direct the flow of information. We would prefer to receive this information by email in light of the load we are placing on our fax lines at this time. Keep up the good work everyone.

Please forward any information you think might be important about the following people and companies.

Chris Jensen
John Michael Edwards
Nev West Securities
Emerson Koch
NNOS (Nanosignal Corporation)
Richard Taulli

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: UPDATE 5/27/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 15:53:14 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Good Afternoon everyone! Bill asked me to put this out this afternoon before we leave for the long weekend.

We have recieved our first response from the SEC on our FOIA request. We will contact the SEC Tuesday morning and provide for the necessary costs to be paid. It appears for now, that they are going to provide us with the requested information.
You can view the document on our web site in the Document section. www.cmkxownersgroup.com

Have a great Memorial Day weekend!

John

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 6/02/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 15:48:30 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, June 2, 2005

Please accept my sincere thanks to all of you that have responded to our request for information on certain companies and individuals. We received quite a bit of information that was not known to this office before your help. This will be helpful as we continue our investigation. We will be looking for information on other people and companies in the next few days.

John has told me of many rumors circulating around the message boards regarding things I have said or not said. I have not been answering many emails due to other matters that are taking up my time. It is safe to say that I am trying to provide any significant information to all of the members at the same time through these updates. If it is not being provided to you from these updates, one should have some serious questions about the validity of the information.

We have contacted the FOIA specialist at the SEC and we have made financial arrangements to pay for our requested materials. We have made arrangements for two people to assist the specialist in obtaining our documents. These people have agreed to go in person to the SEC offices to retrieve our information once it is released. The specialist has been very pleasant and it appears we will have the material in relatively short order. We have asked if it is possible to obtain the documents within the next two weeks. We do not feel like there will be a problem obtaining our material in this time frame. I will update you with a more specific time table once I have confirmed specific dates on when we will be allowed to have access to the documents.

I should have an inquiry letter out to TD Waterhouse Canada tomorrow. The letter will be self explanatory. This will be sent to you via another update. Mr. Stoecklein is back in the country. We spoke at length today. I have explained the concerns over the drilling report submitted with the 8K. Mr. Stoecklein has assured us that his office filed with Edgar the entire report he was given. The mystery of the missing Table 1 still looms. He knows our concerns and plans to visit with the individual that sent the drilling report to his law firm. We will get back with more information once we have received it.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: UPDATE 06/03/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 11:42:35 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, June 3, 2005

I have posted the Post Hearing Brief written by the SEC on the owners’ group web site. www.cmkxownersgroup.com I believe this document was filed with the Court this morning. A response brief is due from the company on or before June 17, 2005. The Court has agreed to accept a brief from the shareholders addressing the issues raised by the SEC brief. We will file our response on or before June 17, 2005.

I have been in discussion with Mr. Stoecklein’s office this morning regarding the matters raised in the brief. Mr. Stoecklein has begun preparation of the company response. It is my understanding that preparation of the financials is continuing. A new auditing firm has been retained to replace Neil Levine. I will provide you with the new auditor’s name when I am so advised.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Extra Update 6/03/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 15:59:02 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, June 3, 2005

My apologies to any of you that may have been waiting on the posting of our letter to TD Waterhouse Canada. I was unable to complete the letter today due to some other matters that needed attention. Many of you have probably read the brief filed by the SEC today. There are many issues that I am currently working on which will be revealed in our response. We are continuing our mailout campaign and our work on the verification of the outstanding stock. We sent out over 1,000 letters today. I have decided not to disclose our share count on a regular basis because the count changes significantly sometimes by the hour. You can rest assured I am pleased with the results of our work so far. There are also strategic reasons for not making our numbers public.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Extra Update 6/08/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 14:06:15 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, June 8, 2005

I have posted now the short reply from TDWaterhouse-Canada to my letter of yesterday. You can see it at www.cmkxownersgroup.com I expect this letter will have to pass through several levels before a response can be made from the company.

We will be sending out several letters to various institutions that are holding positions in CMKX stock. These institutions are reporting various positions in this stock to ADP, our NOBO service. Our inquiries are a direct request to report any short positions to us. Your brokers have a fiduciary duty to act in good faith in all transactions. If there are known problems in this stock, such as a significant naked short position, you should be informed of such. We have had a slight delay in obtaining proper addresses and contact people. Thus these letters may not go out today. We will advise you when these letters are sent.

We are getting occasional calls and emails from members who have received mail out requests for statements and have already sent their information to us. We do not need you to send your information twice, so disregard the letter.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 6/09/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 14:28:27 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, June 9, 2005

I have posted a letter that we sent to Charles Schwab today. It can be seen at www.cmkxownersgroup.com We are including a list of companies that will be receiving a similar letter today or tomorrow. We are receiving a lot of feedback from members that suggests many brokerage houses are troubled by their short positions. Accordingly, we are inquiring specifically about any problems in CMKX stock to the brokerage houses listed in our NOBO.

We have received a total rejection of the FOIA request which was made through the SEC. I am preparing an appeal of that request as provided by statute. It is necessary to pursue all administrative remedies before filing suit. I should have the appeal finished tomorrow and will post it along with the rejection letter.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 6/10/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 12:13:06 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group,

I know that everyone is anxious to see the response from the SEC concerning the FOIA information. So I have posted it before Bills appeal is complete. You can see it at www.cmkxownersgroup.com

Bill had knee surgery this morning, so it is taking him a little longer than he anticipated to finish the appeal. He is laying in bed with his leg propped up, while typing on the keyboard. It sounds as if his bed looks like a law library. He does expect to finish today and I will update you all immediately.
Bill asked that I say, Onward!

John

[sandi66]

Subject: Extra Update 6/10/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 17:30:27 -0700


FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group members:
You can now view the Appeal to the SEC FOIA denial at www.cmkxownersgroup.com

Bill sends his thanks to all the kind get well e-mails. He is doing well. (as you all can tell)

Have a restful weekend!

John

[sandi66]

Subject: SCHWAB terminate account/ From a family member to CHARLES SCHWAB
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 00:23:50 -0400

ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CLB00206&read=30047

By: kashman9
11 Jun 2005, 07:35 PM EDT
Msg. 30047 of 30056

Topic: From a family member to CHARLES SCHWAB - broker

June 11, 2005

Carol J. Hanson
Chairman’s Division/Service Recovery
Charles Schwab
101 Montgomery Street
San Francisco, CA 94104

BY CERTIFIED MAIL and FAX [phone])

REGARDING: Account xxxxxxxxxx

Dear Ms. Hanson:

I am writing in response to our conversation on June 10, 2005 regarding my account with you. For the record, I would like to review what transpired:

1) In November, 2004 – I sent you an email requesting assurances that my position in CMKM Diamonds, Inc. (CMKX) was not shorted in any way.

2) On November 26, 2004 – I received a letter from you stating that my “xxxxxxxx shares of CMKX have not been sold short in any way.”

3) On June 10, 2005 – I called you and asked you to please restate your earlier letter to me, but this time stating that my CMKX position had not been “NAKED” short sold in any way.

4) You refused to provide such a written statement, and stated that you would speak to your General Counsel about this matter.

5) After your conversation with Carrie E Dwyer, General Counsel for Charles Schwab, you called to inform me that:

a. You intend to terminate doing business with me within the next 30 days;
b. The only thing that you will put in writing is that you have the right to terminate my account;
c. My CMKX dividend shares (CIM, GEMM, and USCA) have been deemed “worthless” and a “courtesy sell” will take place in 30 days.

I certainly no longer wish to do business with a broker that would, without explanation, wish to terminate a business relationship with me. I therefore request that the following actions be taken immediately, and at no cost to me:

1. I demand a refund of $658.90 – the commissions that I paid to Charles Schwab to purchase my position in CMKX. Since this is a Charles Schwab-initiated action, I demand a refund of the fees that I paid. Please send me a personal check in this amount immediately.

2. I demand that Charles Schwab order the following Certificates immediately (from the Transfer Agents and at no cost to me), and that they be sent to me by certified mail:

• CMKM diamonds Inc.: CMKX xxxxxxxxxx shares

• Casavant International Mining Corp. Private Company Ticker/Symbol CIM xxxxxxxxxx shares (Restricted and Privately-held)

• Juina Mining Corporation Ticker/Symbol GEMM xxxxxxxxxx shares (restricted)

• US Canadian Minerals Ticker/Symbol USCA xxxxxxxxxx shares (restricted)

3. I hereby DEMAND that you take no action whatsoever to sell or liquidate my dividend shares, as described in number 2 above.

In closing, I must say as a result of making a simple request, it seems that draconian (and highly irregular and unprofessional) measures have been taken by you and/or your General Counsel. I have been with Charles Schwab for over five years and have paid thousands of dollars in commissions. Within a period of five hours, and as an apparent result of my making a simple
request for my piece of mind, you decided to terminate my business. Do you treat all your “Preferred” members this way?

If you have any questions regarding my above demands, please contact me as soon as possible. Please confirm to me in writing at your earliest convenience that you have processed my CERT requests as outlined above.

Thank You,

//SIGNATURE//


cc: Carrie E. Dwyer, General Counsel – Charles Schwab
Bill Frizzell, Esq. (CMKM Diamonds – Owners’ Group)
Andrew Hill, Investor Relations, CMKM Diamonds, Inc.
Don Stocklein, Esq.

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 6/13/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 10:43:55 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

To the Owners Group members:

The answer from Ameritrade is now available at www.cmkxownersgroup.com

You all will be glad to know that Bill is in the office this morning and is getting around fine. He is preparing a response to Ameritrade and it should be out no later than in the morning. He is very busy working on the hearing brief to the Judge and several other important matters, otherwise it would be out today.

Have a great day!

John

[sandi66]

Subject: UPDATE 06/14/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 16:53:23 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group Members:

Bills response to the latest Ameritrade letter is now available for reading. www.cmkxownersgroup.com
Please be advised that we are in crunch time around here for the next three days, and we may not be able to return as many e-mails and calls as usual. Thank you for your patience with us.
For Bill,
ONWARD!

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 6/16/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 12:09:44 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

To all Owners Group members:

Bill is aware that there are varying responses from E-Trade as to what is going on today concerning some of your accounts. As he decides what to do about the situation he needs as much documentation to what is being communicated to you. He asked me to have any of you in states that allow recording of phone calls who will be calling E-Trade, to record and then transcribe the call to paper and fax it to us. (save the recording in case he needs it) Those of you who have gotten e-mails from E-Trade, please print and fax to 903-595-4383. PLEASE do not fax to the fax in campaign number, and please do not e-mail them, as our e-mail accounts are getting very full.

For those of you with account problems other than E-Trade, please do the same thing as above, as we have a file for each broker. Bill may need to address them as well in the coming days.
We appologize for delays in getting back to all of you who have e-mailed or called as we are very busy trying to get all the numbers together for Bills brief tomorrow. If at all possible, it would be very helpful if questions could be held for the time being so we can finish the data input in a timely fashion.

Thank you for your patience with us during this crunch time.

For Bill,
"ONWARD"

[sandi66]

Subject: Extra Update 6/17/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 16:59:12 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

To all Owners Group Members:

You can now view the brief from The Stoecklein Law Firm on our page at www.cmkxownersgroup.com

John

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 06/18/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:34:55 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

To the CMKX Owners Group:

I just wanted to bring everyone up to date as I know you are all anxiously awaiting Bills brief. I just went into his office and he looked at me and said "please ask everyone to be patient, this is possibly the most important document I have ever written. I promise I will have it out this weekend." The brief from the company caused him to want to change several things and he seemed very determined and deep in thought. I did not have the heart to ask him if he could give me a time to give you all as to when he would be done.

I will come into the office to scan it and update you no matter what time it is, but for now, go out and enjoy the weekend.

John

[sandi66]

Subject: update 06/20/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 22:35:30 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group members:
You can now read Bills brief at www.cmkxownersgroup.com
Thank you all very much for your patience!

For Bill,

"ONWARD"

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 06/21/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:02:37 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group members:

You can read the objection to Bills brief from the SEC at www.cmkxownersgroup.com

I think we struck a nerve.

"ONWARD"
John

[sandi66]

Subject: Extra Update 6/21/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 11:44:27 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group members:

You can now read the SEC Hearing transcripts on our page at www.cmkxownersgroup.com

Thank you all for your e-mails about the SEC response to Bills brief. There have literally been hundreds. Please forgive me if I don't return them all. In reguards to the response, Bill is contemplating our next move, and will let us know in the next day or so what he decides.

John

[sandi66]

Subject: Phase 2
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 20:33:10 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

To the Owners Group members:
From: John Martin

First I would like to thank each and every one of you who have helped support this movement. There is no doubt in my mind that without your help our company may have already been revoked, and no one would have known any better. Because of you all, the world knows more about naked shorting, and they know about our plight as CMKX shareholders.

I know it was very scary at first with an attorney jumping into the scene because, unfortunately, there are bad apples in every profession, and also unfortunately most of us have either dealt with one or have heard bad things.

I also understand how difficult it was with some stranger jumping in and hiring the attorney. How dare he! Who does he think he is? I agree, I would have thought the same thing. I commend each and every one of you though for looking past your fears, and giving Bill a chance. You now have seen what I knew, and that is, that Bill is an incredible attorney who cares about his clients. He is also the type of attorney that will jump in with both feet for someone. He took a very big chance in this case for me, for us. He put his 27 year law practice on the line, virtually shutting everything down so he could work on this case. I think you all agree with me that he has done an incredible job for us, his clients.

I have asked Bill if he would consider continuing to work for the group. His response to me was that he would be honored to work for us if we so desired. I immediately went to some of the most respected posters on the boards and asked their opinions as to whether they felt the OG would like for Bill to continue with Phase 2, and if so, how did they think Bill should word his agreement with everyone? Every one of them stated to me essentially the same thing. John, as long as Bill is not going to involve us in a class action law suit, we trust that he is going to do everything he can to protect our interests, we feel he should have the liberty to do what he thinks he needs to do.

It is important to know that Bill is very sensitive to the issue of giving his clients something for their money. I have asked him to make another agreement and for him to put in there the few items that he wanted to stipulate he was going to do for the fee of 25.00 per person. The only thing he requested of me was to make sure that everyone understands that if he has to litigate with any entities other than with the SEC over the FOIA, (which he would like to do right away) he will need to ask for more funds. (as you know, Bill does not like litigation because it is expensive and time consuming, so he will come to the shareholders first before instigating anything of this sort).

I also want everyone to know that Bill does not consider the Phase 1 agreement to be over until the Judge makes her ruling. Bill is going to continue updating the group, and doing everything he needs to do to continue protecting us. He is just having to go way beyond the Phase 1 activities now, and needs to secure the agreement with all of us for the new and upcoming work.

There have been several hundred sign ups over the last few weeks, as well as folks that have been donating more funds. I want to be fair to all of you and make sure that your dollars go toward the new agreement. If you have signed up since June 1st or donated funds since the same date, please note this on your agreement when you fill it out and we will cross check your info with what has come in since June 1 and include you in the new group.

I know there are going to be new members joining our family, and
unfortunately there will be those who do not wish to continue with us. For this reason I have asked the IT GUY to make a new data base for all who sign the new agreement. This time we will not need your information pertaining to your holdings, but we would like your address and phone numbers. There were several instances in which we needed a phone number over the past few months and were not able to contact a shareholder. Do not feel you have to supply this information if you would prefer not to..

I realize that most of you know and appreciate all that has been done by Bill to keep our company from being revoked. I have heard concerns from many that know that the $25 fee probably was barely enough to pay the expenses, and they are right.

However, I would like to talk for a second to those of you (and it is only a few) who are going to object to my asking for everyone to chip in again. I may as well head off the arguments right up front. I have been asked many times to post the accounting of expenses and have decided to handle it in this manner.

Only 4223 of the 5582 have sent in their monies from the first agreement.

Bill has not brought in 140k as is being posted.

The Law Firm has transferred all new business to other attorneys. Bill took on no new accounts, and finished the ones he was on quickly so he could spend 100% of his time on the Owners Group. Bill has spent probably 80 hours per week on this case. I know because I was there most of the time. If Bill had even come close to billing us his normal rate, he would have burned up the cash over a month ago.

Instead, he bought the equipment he needed, hired the people he needed, (Maintained 19 people at one time for 72 hours straight just before the hearing) he bought the stamps and paper and envelopes needed for the mail out, travel on two trips, the phone bill was over $1200 per month, the electric bill was more than double, the new server upgrade, the web page was designed and built, and on and on and on. I doubt that Bill did anything but keep his doors open at most.

Most of all, I would like you all to know that I think this group is one of the most powerful forces in our market. We have accomplished more in a few months than anyone ever expected. Yes Bill is a good attorney, but the reason he is so good is because you all have rallied around him.

The power of the group comes across in his documents and his actions. You all are the reason for our success and it is extremely important we continue to grow stronger and larger. We can accomplish far more than we have already, and I know we will.

The Phase 2 agreement will be up on the Owners Group site after lunch central time tomorrow (WED 22nd) at www.cmkxownersgroup.com

Thank you again for all your support and help.

John Martin

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 06/27/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:21:22 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group Members, June 27, 2005

Hello to all. It has been an interesting day hearing about all of the rumors. You can rest assured that I am not engaged in any discussions involving tender offers to shareholders of any set amount. I know of no pending dividends from the company. If such negotiations are ongoing, the parties have decided not to involve me.

I am working on the followup exhibit that I referenced in our brief. This will be filed shortly.

I have received questions from many shareholders demanding to know why the Judge has not acted on our evidence. Please understand that our proof of a naked short is compelling but there is significant resistance to our evidence. The SEC has taken a position that there is no naked short position in this company. Judge Murray is not required to evaluate our evidence to see if there is cause to demand any investigation. Her job is to decide what to do with CMKM, if we do not file our financials. It is my job as your attorney to make the most of this naked short evidence. Our work is still ongoing in this area even though we are confident in the numbers we have. I have every intention of presenting this information to appropriate law enforcement officials at the right time.

A meeting has been agreed to with an official on the Senate Banking Committee staff for this coming Friday (7-1-05) in Washington, D.C. I look forward to presenting our evidence on Friday.

Several of the members have asked for some clarification on the Phase 2 agreement which is now available at www.cmkxownersgroup.com I will try to clear up any questions in a short update tomorrow.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 06/28/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 15:08:27 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, June 28, 2005

Greetings group members. I have presented a Motion to Judge Murray requesting her permission to allow us to file our evidence which proves significant naked shorting of our stock. It has been posted on our group website www.cmkxownersgroup.com . You should remember that we were not allowed to participate in this hearing as a party to this proceeding. We were granted limited participation and we were not allowed to present witnesses at the hearing.

The rules require Judge Murray’s permission before such evidence will be admitted in this proceeding. Judge Murray has been exceedingly fair to the shareholders throughout the proceeding. Her rulings have been based on sound legal precedence. This Motion will draw opposition from the SEC. They will say it is untimely, irrelevant and probably a host of other things. This should be expected because the SEC does not want evidence of naked shorting to be a part of this hearing. That is the SEC attorney’s job to object to such evidence. They are advocates for their cause just as I am an advocate of yours.

Judge Murray will ultimately rule on this request. If she grants it, we are prepared to file the CD containing copies of all of our summaries and all other accompanying exhibits. You can see that I have requested confidential treatment of our evidence. The Court will likewise make a ruling on that request if she allows us to offer our evidence.

I would imagine the Judge is more concerned with the proper action to take if there is no attempt by the company to produce the late filings. We will wait for her response. She could rule at any time. She could wait until her final decision and deny our request. It is simply up to her.

I am working on a short presentation similar to the attachments to this motion which we can present to anyone that has interest in our claims of naked shorting. If things go well in Washington DC on Friday I will be presenting similar materials to some people that can make things happen if they are convinced of our evidence.

Best regards,
Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 6/28/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 15:16:47 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, June 28, 2005

Greetings group members. I have presented a Motion to Judge Murray requesting her permission to allow us to file our evidence which proves significant naked shorting of our stock. It has been posted on our group website www.cmkxownersgroup.com . You should remember that we were not allowed to participate in this hearing as a party to this proceeding. We were granted limited participation and we were not allowed to present witnesses at the hearing.

The rules require Judge Murray’s permission before such evidence will be admitted in this proceeding. Judge Murray has been exceedingly fair to the shareholders throughout the proceeding. Her rulings have been based on sound legal precedence. This Motion will draw opposition from the SEC. They will say it is untimely, irrelevant and probably a host of other things. This should be expected because the SEC does not want evidence of naked shorting to be a part of this hearing. That is the SEC attorney’s job to object to such evidence. They are advocates for their cause just as I am an advocate of yours.

Judge Murray will ultimately rule on this request. If she grants it, we are prepared to file the CD containing copies of all of our summaries and all other accompanying exhibits. You can see that I have requested confidential treatment of our evidence. The Court will likewise make a ruling on that request if she allows us to offer our evidence.

I would imagine the Judge is more concerned with the proper action to take if there is no attempt by the company to produce the late filings. We will wait for her response. She could rule at any time. She could wait until her final decision and deny our request. It is simply up to her.

I am working on a short presentation similar to the attachments to this motion which we can present to anyone that has interest in our claims of naked shorting. If things go well in Washington DC on Friday I will be presenting similar materials to some people that can make things happen if they are convinced of our evidence.

Best regards,
Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 6/29/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:14:06 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group Members:
You can now read the TD Waterhouse response to Bills letter on our web page.
www.cmkxownersgroup.com Bill will be responding to this letter.

For Bill,
"Onward"

John

[sandi66]

Subject: Extra Update 06/29/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 14:46:49 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group Members:
You can now see the SEC response to the CMKX reply brief at : www.cmkxownersgroup.com

For Bill,
"Onward"

John

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 06/30/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 14:30:45 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group members:
The SEC has filed their opposition to Bills Motion for Leave of Court to file "Shareholder Exhibit 1"
You can now read it at www.cmkxownersgroup.com/documents.php

For Bill,
"ONWARD"

John

[sandi66]

Subject: Extra Update 06/30/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 15:26:37 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

To all CMKX Owners Group members:

Bill has called in about his meeting today with Senator Sarbanes office, and I wanted to at least let you know a few things that went on before he returns and brings you all up to date more thoroughly.

The meeting took place at 2:30 eastern time, with Senator Sarbanes Chief Council Steve Harris. From what I understand, Mr. Harris is the director of the Senate Banking Committee. Also present was Senator Sarbanes Legislative aid Dean Shahinian. Judi Behrens a CMKX shareholder, who set up the meeting, was also present. The meeting was to be held tomorrow initially, but was bumped up to today due to business on the Hill. Bill scrambled to the airport in Dallas on short notice very early this morning and went on standby in order to catch an earlier flight. Fortunately he arrived a few hours before the appointment.

Bill said that Mr. Harris asked very good questions, and was very knowledgeable about the issue. Mr. Harris knows there is a problem, and requested that Bill begin to funnel information to him. He also requested that we begin to involve the main stream media as much as possible.

Bill said the door of communication is wide open, and that he is very positive about the entire meeting. He had the opportunity to go through very carefully, all of our evidence of Naked Shorting.

Bill will return on Saturday, and I am sure he will update everyone more thoroughly after the holiday.

I hope you are all able to enjoy this long weekend, sorry I don’t know more to share.

"ONWARD"

John

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 7/6/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 08:17:45 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, July 6, 2005

John Martin is out of the office and will return on Friday. He is out of town on CMKX business so hold your calls until Friday if you wish to speak to him. He may be able to return some emails but I understand there are some problems with his remote hookup. Many of you have visited with my legal assistant Goldie Norris in the last few months. She is taking the remainder of the week off for a long scheduled vacation. She is very dedicated and very loyal and expressed her concerns about being out of the office the remainder of this week. Her vacation has been planned for quite sometime. You will see below that I am working on some other matters which will prevent me from taking calls at least until tomorrow. Any calls that come to the office may be answered by temporary help or call notes. All messages will be forwarded to me.

I am currently “encouraging” the company and the SEC to enter into formal settlement discussions before we receive a ruling by Judge Murray. I plan on asking the Judge (by written motion if necessary) to allow us time to explore all options before she rules. Judge Murray has indicated she will rule by July 17. I am hopeful we will be given the benefit of the next week or so to try to come to some agreement. The issues in these settlement discussions are not terribly complicated but I am not convinced the company and the SEC have fully discussed all avenues of settlement at this point. Phone conferences are planned this morning with the company.

There has been discussion about appealing any adverse ruling by the court and continuing our work on the financials during the appeals process. Although we may be resigned to this fate, I am adamantly opposed to such unless we have fully explored all other options. I have made myself clear to the company about our position.

I am convinced that work is continuing on the financials. It is my understanding that there will be some announcements about the new auditor any day now. There were tentative plans for me to be in Fort Lauderdale tomorrow, Ecuador over the weekend and Canada next week. I have told Urban that I will not be going to Ecuador or to Canada until we have exhausted every avenue to avoid deregistration. I have also cancelled my trip to Fort Lauderdale to meet with the Eagletech people tomorrow. I plan to reschedule this meeting as well.

The court has entered an order striking the portions of my brief referring to naked short selling. Her ruling denies the admission of SH Exhibit 1. It is apparent she will not consider our evidence of naked shorting in her ruling. I will have this order posted this afternoon.

We are continuing to gather shareholder statements and adding the numbers to our total. This remains critical evidence as I meet with other parties (mostly politician types and law enforcement types). I have met formally with a non local office of the FBI. A meeting with the Department of Justice is being arranged.

I will report to you the progress of any settlement talks as soon as I am able.
Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 7/08/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 17:01:12 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, July 8, 2005

John Martin returned to the office today and has done some incredible due diligence. As your attorney the information that I continuously receive from shareholders allows me to be a more effective advocate on your behalf. I realize how fortunate I am to have such dedicated shareholders. I will not name any names for many reasons, but I want you to know that I am eternally grateful for those that are spending time and dollars to keep this fight going. Your investigative skill and dedication to our mission is appreciated by me more than you can ever know. When I talk with the company attorneys, or UC, or the SEC, it is much easier to present the shareholder’s perspective when I can speak with knowledge of what has gone on in the past and what may be transpiring as we speak. The SEC has a policy of not disclosing any information that may pertain to an “ongoing investigation”. CMKX is still an “ongoing investigation”. The company is cooperating in our efforts and is in fact sharing some information with me but I feel it is vital that we do our own due diligence.

I have talked with Don Stoecklein on several occasions in the last two days. I understand some of the problems he has experienced with the hiring of a new auditor. An announcement will come from the company by way of an 8(K) when he is officially engaged. The office staff at Opus Point and in Mr. Stoecklein’s office has continued to work on all the various schedules needed by the auditor. We have discussed the parameters of a settlement proposal. I am very hopeful we can get this proposal to the SEC for their consideration in the next day or two. I cannot post any rough drafts because they are preliminary. I assure you that I will post something as soon as I am able. I do not expect to hear from Don Stoecklein again until Monday.

The ruling by Judge Murray on our request to offer SH Exhibit 1 says in the first paragraph that the initial decision is due by July 21, 2005. This date was computed by adding 120 days to the date the OIP was served on the company. The OIP was filed on March 16, 2005 but the answer date and final opinion dates are governed by the date the OIP was served on the company. I do not know of the specific date the OIP was served on CMKX but apparently it was 120 days before July 21, 2005. The Court commented during the hearing that she believed her ruling was due July 15. This would have been correct if the 120 days ran from the date of filing of the OIP or if the OIP was filed and served on the same date. This does not mean there has been any extension granted but most probably the correct date was computed by looking at the date the OIP was actually served on the company. The Court has a procedure where she can ask for an extension of time to rule in this matter if she needs such extension, but no such request has been made at this time to my knowledge.

I talked with UC on Tuesday and Wednesday. He again expressed his intentions to get these matters behind us. We have agreed to revisit a trip to Ecuador and Canada after this revocation proceeding is settled or ruled upon.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 7/12/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 12:48:30 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, July 12, 2005

We are posting on the CMKX owners’ group website www.cmkxownersgroup.com the initial decision of Judge Murray. I received my copy by fax at 1:37 p.m. (Central time). Judge Murray has entered an initial decision revoking the registration of all CMKX securities.

I have been working with CMKX attorney Don Stoecklein for several days now on a proposal to settle this matter. This morning Mr. Stoecklein sent a settlement proposal to the SEC attorneys and to Judge Murray’s office. It is my understanding this settlement offer was received by the SEC and Judge Murray before this decision was handed down. I had signed the settlement proposal and we were hopeful this matter could be resolved without the Judge’s ruling. The ruling pretty well speaks for itself.

The company had difficulty in reengaging a new auditor. The new auditor has been officially hired but the company believed it had to do a formal 8K before announcing the new auditor.

I have been in discussion with Mr. Stoecklein and I will give you a more definitive response to this decision later on today. The company plans to immediately appeal this decision. As you can tell from the judge’s decision, this is not a final order until the Commission reviews the decision.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Extra Update 7/12/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 18:20:59 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, July 12, 2005

By now most shareholders probably know Judge Murray has rendered an initial decision revoking the registration of CMKX securities. I felt like I had been kicked in the gut when I saw the decision coming off of my fax line today. Frankly, when I saw the Administrative Law Judge’s letterhead on the first page, I thought it was remarkable that the Court would comment so quickly on the filing of our settlement offer. When I realized what the document contained, I was disappointed and a bit surprised. Not in the decision and not in the reasoning of the decision, but in the timing of the decision.

Settlement Proposal

Don Stoecklein and I had been struggling with the wording of our settlement proposal for a couple of weeks. It was our belief that no settlement offer would ever be considered by the SEC attorneys nor the Commission unless a qualified auditor was formally engaged. The auditor did extensive due diligence before accepting this job. The negotiations by Don Stoecklein were carried out with the auditor’s attorney as well. Once an agreement was reached with the auditor, Don Stoecklein felt the SEC rules required an 8K filing of the auditor’s engagement but we had not received a signoff from the prior auditor. The company began securing the signoff letter but the settlement proposal was sent without having it in hand. I am giving you only a bit of the background leading up to our settlement proposal. I am not making excuses nor suggesting that many of these delays could not have been avoided.

Brad Beckstead was engaged as our new auditor yesterday. I am not at liberty to discuss the actual amount paid to Mr. Beckstead but it was a six figure amount. It was not as high as the $360,000 figure rumored on the boards this morning, but a very substantial figure was paid to Mr. Beckstead according to the company. It is my understanding that the amount paid was a retainer and additional fees may be incurred. I expect the company to file an 8K by the end of the week announcing the engagement of this auditor. We are still under SEC rules since this decision is not a final decision. I am told the rules allow the company 4 days to announce this engagement.

What becomes of the settlement offer we have proposed? We will continue to seek settlement of this proceeding. Our offer of settlement remains. The appeals process can be a long one. I have been assured the auditor can complete the audit within 120 days. The completed audits will not take as long as the appeals process in any event. Our case has many of the same facts found in the E-Smart decision mentioned by Judge Murray at the beginning of the administrative proceeding. Our facts in my opinion are more compelling than the factual scenario of E-Smart. (assuming we get the financials filed in the next few months). I will try to get the three part decision of E-Smart posted for those of you who might want to read a similar case decided by the Commission. I am hopeful that there will be some future dialogue about settlement once we can convince the SEC that work on these financials is proceeding.

Our Trading Status Now?

As part of our settlement offer, we suggested a trading halt in the interim period while we await the filing of our past due financials. This offer was designed to satisfy the SEC’s concerns about future investors. It appears now that trading will continue in spite of our offer. Rule 360 of the SEC Rules of Practice basically says the status of the parties (trading allowed) remains the same until an aggrieved party (CMKX) prosecutes its appeal.

Where Do We Go From Here?

Folks, we took a risk (admittedly seems a bit larger than we thought at the time) when we bought this stock. We have watched this stock plummet to the bottom and now we have an initial order of revocation to overcome. The facts still remain-if the company has the goods and if the company gets these financials filed, there remains some significant gain to be made. John has told me that a few of his friends have sent him farewell notes. People speak of losing all of their investment and writing things off. This is music to the ears of the market makers and brokerage houses that have mountains of electronic markers backed by your hard earned dollars.

Hell folks, the stock is virtually worthless (.00008) as it is. Hang in there and lets fight these crooks. Penny stock investors always walk away. They do not usually have large investments in these stocks. That’s what convinces the short sellers that easy money is to be made when there is a mountain of outstanding stock and the SEC is coming down on management. Lets be different. Watch these people with the big short positions snatch up these shares (real shares) as people give up. In Texas you hear the old saying “When you always do what you always done, you always get what you always got.” Lets be different.

I have watched many live professional boxing matches. I had the pleasure of managing a world champion for several years. I was always amazed at how these guys could stand out there in the ring and pulverize each other (gashes, swelling, cuts, bruises) for 10 or 12 rounds and sit back in the dressing room after the fight and have a good laugh. Well, SEC, you have won the first round. Leslie Hakala and Greg Glynn did a very good job of presenting evidence to the judge which fully justifies her decision. For whatever reason, our company was unable to get the ship righted in time to win round one. But we will come off the stool for the second round.

I know there are those that think I must really be drinking the kool aid around here. I will not pump this stock because I still have some questions that I hope to have answered very soon. The company has invited me to go to Ecuador with the auditor at the same time. I have been invited to Canada for a tour of the assets. I refused to go thinking we could head off revocation if I stayed here and worked with the company attorney on this settlement proposal. Now we have another course. I will be scheduling my trip as soon as practical.

Lets Keep Fighting The Good Fight

Please understand we are not parties to this proceeding. I have no right to appeal anything. Only the company has the right to appeal this decision. My plans are as follows. I am going to suggest to Mr. Stoecklein and Urban that we would like to have an independent auditor to have a bi weekly conference with Mr. Beckstead to monitor his progress in these audits. I will also inquire if I can be given a status report from Mr. Stoecklein on the filing of the Petition for Review on an every other day basis if necessary. I will be more than willing to provide appellate assistance or provide any help to the company so that the appeals process will go according the plan as I understand it from the company at this time. I will report to you the response of the company to my requests. I will likewise report to you in whatever detail I can, my findings in Ecuador and Saskatchewan. Lets play this thing out folks. And to you short sellers out there, this game is not over with by a long shot.

Onward,

Bill