Initial Decision Release No. 1333

Administrative Proceeding

File No. 3-18204

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

In the Matter of

GO EZ Corporation, 

Green St. Energy, Inc., 

Hyperview Ltd., and 

Imogo Mobile Technologies Corp.

Initial Decision of Default

December 13, 2018

Appearance: David S. Frye for the Division of Enforcement,

Securities and Exchange Commission

Before: Cameron Elliot, Administrative Law Judge

SUMMARY

This initial decision revokes the registration of the registered securities 

of Respondents GO EZ Corporation, Green St. Energy, Inc., Hyperview Ltd., 

and Imogo Mobile Technologies Corp. due to their failures to file required 

periodic reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

INTRODUCTION

On September 25, 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued 

an order instituting proceedings (OIP) pursuant to Section 12(j) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934, alleging that Respondents have securities 

registered with the Commission under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act and 

are delinquent in their periodic filings.

A different administrative law judge was originally assigned to this 

proceeding and issued an initial decision of default against Respondents. GO 

EZ Corp., Initial Decision Release No. 1216, 2017 SEC LEXIS 3476 (ALJ 

Nov. 1, 2017). The Commission vacated that decision following the Supreme 
2

Court’s decision in Lucia v. SEC, 138 S. Ct. 2044 (2018). See Pending Admin. 

Proc., Securities Act of 1933 Release No. 10536, 2018 SEC LEXIS 2058, at *2-

3 (Aug. 22, 2018). The matter was then reassigned to me to provide 

Respondents with the opportunity for a new hearing. Pending Admin. Proc., 

Admin. Proc. Rulings Release No. 5955, 2018 SEC LEXIS 2264, at *2-3 (ALJ 

Sept. 12, 2018). Respondents were directed to submit proposals for the 

conduct of further proceedings. GO EZ Corp., Admin. Proc. Rulings Release 

No. 6056, 2018 SEC LEXIS 2519, at *1 (ALJ Sept. 21, 2018). None did. I 

have therefore proceeded under the Commission’s instruction not to give 

weight to or otherwise presume the correctness of any prior opinions, orders, 

or rulings issued by the prior administrative law judge. Pending Admin. 

Proc., 2018 SEC LEXIS 2058, at *4.

Previously, I independently reviewed the evidence submitted by the 

Division and determined that Respondents were served with the OIP by 

September 28, 2017. GO EZ Corp., Admin. Proc. Rulings Release No. 6329, 

2018 SEC LEXIS 3224, at *1-2 (ALJ Nov. 15, 2018). Because Respondents 

failed to answer, I ordered them to show cause why the registration of their 

securities should not be revoked by default due to their failures to file 

answers or otherwise defend this proceeding. Id. at *2. To date, Respondents 

have failed to answer, submit proposals for the conduct of further 

proceedings, respond to the show cause order, or otherwise defend this 

proceeding.

FINDINGS OF FACT

GO EZ Corporation, Central Index Key (CIK) No. 314197 and ticker 

symbol GEZC, is a void Delaware corporation located in Miami Beach, 

Florida, with a class of securities registered with the Commission pursuant to 

Exchange Act Section 12(g). The company is delinquent in its periodic filings 

with the Commission, having not filed any periodic reports since it filed a 

Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2015, which reported a net 

loss of $240,426,440 for the prior nine months. On May 9, 2017, an initial 

decision of default was entered suspending the effectiveness of the company’s 

registration statement on Form S-1, filed on February 12, 2015, and declared 

effective on November 6, 2015, based on material misstatements therein and 

the company’s lack of cooperation in the examination conducted by the 

Division. GO EZ Corp., Initial Decision Release No. 1132, 2017 SEC LEXIS 

1362 (ALJ), finality order, Securities Act Release No. 10400, 2017 SEC 

LEXIS 2481 (Aug. 14, 2017). As of September 20, 2017, the company’s 

common stock was traded on the over-the-counter markets.

Green St. Energy, Inc., CIK No. 883842, is a void Delaware corporation 

located in Tehachapi, California, with a class of securities registered with the 
3

Commission pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12(g). The company is 

delinquent in its periodic filings with the Commission, having not filed any 

periodic reports since it filed a Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 

2009, which reported a net loss of $1,856,257 for the prior nine months. On 

April 11, 2016, the Commission suspended trading in the company’s 

securities for ten business days based on questions concerning its operating 

status. Bus. Mktg. Servs., Inc., Exchange Act Release No. 77574, 2016 SEC

LEXIS 1331, at *1-2. As of September 20, 2017, the company’s common stock 

was not publicly quoted or traded.

Hyperview Ltd., CIK No. 1028536, is a permanently revoked Nevada 

corporation located in New York, New York, with a class of securities 

registered with the Commission pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12(g). The 

company is delinquent in its periodic filings with the Commission, having not 

filed any periodic reports since it filed a Form 10-K1 for the fiscal year ended 

December 31, 2011, which reported a net loss of $7,039 for the prior year. On 

October 27, 2008, the Commission entered an order revoking the registration 

of each class of Hyperview’s (then known as Inter Con PC, Inc.) securities 

registered under Exchange Act Section 12(g). Entm’t Techs. & Programs, 

Inc., Exchange Act Release No. 58858, 2008 SEC LEXIS 3105. Thereafter, 

Hyperview re-registered its common stock under Exchange Act Section 12(g) 

pursuant to a Form 10-12G filed on February 11, 2009. As of September 20, 

2017, the company’s common stock was not publicly quoted or traded.

Imogo Mobile Technologies Corp., CIK No. 1347870, is a dissolved 

Nevada corporation located in Bellingham, Washington, with a class of 

securities registered with the Commission pursuant to Exchange Act Section

12(g). The company is delinquent in its periodic filings with the Commission, 

having not filed any periodic reports since it filed a Form 10-Q for the period 

ended February 28, 2014, which reported a net loss of $7,567 for the prior 

three months. On February 19, 2014, the Commission suspended trading in 

the company’s securities for ten business days based on questions concerning 

the accuracy and adequacy of publicly disseminated information concerning 

its business, revenue, and assets. Imogo Mobile Techs. Corp., Exchange Act 

Release No. 71568, 2014 SEC LEXIS 584. As of September 20, 2017, the 

company’s common stock was not publicly quoted or traded.

 

1 The OIP states that Hyperview’s last filing was a Form 10-QSB. 

According to filings on the EDGAR database, of which I take official notice, 

this was actually a Form 10-K. Hyperview Ltd., Annual Report (Form 10-K)

(Apr. 13, 2012); see OIP at 2.
4

In addition to their repeated failures to file timely periodic reports, 

Respondents failed to heed the delinquency letters sent to them by the 

Commission’s Division of Corporation Finance requesting compliance with 

their periodic filing obligations or, through their failures to maintain valid 

addresses on file with the Commission as required by Commission rules, did 

not receive such letters.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 require issuers 

of securities registered with the Commission pursuant to Exchange Act 

Section 12 to file with the Commission current and accurate information in 

annual and quarterly reports, even if the registration is voluntary under 

Exchange Act Section 12(g). 17 C.F.R. §§ 240.13a-1, .13a-13. Compliance 

with these reporting requirements is mandatory. America’s Sports Voice, 

Inc., Exchange Act Release No. 55511, 2007 SEC LEXIS 1241, at *12 (Mar. 

22, 2007), recons. denied, Exchange Act Release No. 55867, 2007 SEC LEXIS 

1239 (June 6, 2007). Scienter is not required to establish violations of 

Exchange Act Section 13(a) and rules thereunder. SEC v. McNulty, 137 F.3d 

732, 740-41 (2d Cir. 1998). By failing to file required annual and quarterly 

reports, Respondents violated Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 13a-1 

and 13a-13.

SANCTION

Under Exchange Act Section 12(j), the Commission is authorized, “as it 

deems necessary or appropriate for the protection of investors,” to revoke the 

registration of a security or suspend the registration for a period not 

exceeding twelve months if it finds, after notice and an opportunity for 

hearing, that the issuer of the security has failed to comply with any 

provision of the Exchange Act or rules thereunder. 15 U.S.C. § 78l(j). In 

determining what sanctions will adequately protect investors, the 

Commission “consider[s], among other things, the seriousness of the issuer’s 

violations, the isolated or recurrent nature of the violations, the degree of 

culpability involved, the extent of the issuer’s efforts to remedy its past 

violations and ensure future compliance, and the credibility of its assurances, 

if any, against further violations.” Gateway Int’l Holdings, Inc., Exchange 

Act Release No. 53907, 2006 SEC LEXIS 1288, at *19-20 (May 31, 2006).

Respondents’ failures to file required periodic reports are serious because 

they violate a central provision of the Exchange Act. The purpose of periodic 

reporting is “to supply investors with current and accurate financial 

information about an issuer so that they may make sound [investment] 

decisions.” Id. at *26. The reporting requirements are the primary tool that 
5

Congress “fashioned for the protection of investors from negligent, careless, 

and deliberate misrepresentations” in the sale of securities. Eagletech 

Commc’ns, Inc., Exchange Act Release No. 54095, 2006 SEC LEXIS 1534, at 

*12 (July 5, 2006) (quoting SEC v. Beisinger Indus. Corp., 552 F.2d 15, 18 

(1st Cir. 1977)). The violations are recurrent in that Respondents failed to 

file any periodic reports since 2015 at the latest. See Nature’s Sunshine 

Prods., Inc., Exchange Act Release No. 59268, 2009 SEC LEXIS 81, at *20 

(Jan. 21, 2009); Impax Labs., Inc., Exchange Act Release No. 57864, 2008 

SEC LEXIS 1197, at *25-26 (May 23, 2008). Respondents are culpable 

because they knew, or should have known, of their obligation to file periodic 

reports. China-Biotics, Inc., Exchange Act Release No. 70800, 2013 SEC 

LEXIS 3451, at *37 & n.60 (Nov. 4, 2013) (holding that scienter is not 

necessary to establish grounds for revocation); Robert L. Burns, Investment 

Advisers Act of 1940 Release No. 3260, 2011 SEC LEXIS 2722, at *41 n.60

(Aug. 5, 2011) (stating that the Commission has “repeatedly held that 

ignorance of the securities laws is not a defense to liability thereunder”). 

They further failed to heed the delinquency letters sent to them by the 

Division of Corporation Finance. Even if Respondents did not receive such 

letters due to their failures to maintain valid addresses on file with the 

Commission as required by Commission rules, the other factors weigh in 

favor of revocation, and scienter is not necessary to establish grounds for 

revocation. See China-Biotics, Inc., 2013 SEC LEXIS 3451, at *37 & n.60. In 

any event, there is no indication that their violations were inadvertent or 

accidental. Id. Finally, Respondents have not answered the OIP, submitted 

proposals for the further conduct of this proceeding, responded to the show 

cause order, or otherwise participated in the proceeding to address whether 

they have made any efforts to remedy their past violations, and have made no 

assurances against further violations.

On these facts, it is necessary and appropriate for the protection of 

investors to revoke the registrations of each class of Respondents’ registered 

securities.

ORDER

I ORDER that, pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act 

of 1934, the registrations of each class of registered securities of GO EZ 
6

Corporation, Green St. Energy, Inc., Hyperview Ltd., and Imogo Mobile 

Technologies Corp. are REVOKED.2

This initial decision shall become effective in accordance with and 

subject to the provisions of Rule of Practice 360. 17 C.F.R. § 201.360. 

Pursuant to that Rule, I FURTHER ORDER that a party may file a petition 

for review of this initial decision within twenty-one days after service of the 

initial decision. 17 C.F.R. § 201.360(b). A party may also file a motion to 

correct a manifest error of fact within ten days of the initial decision, 

pursuant to Rule of Practice 111. 17 C.F.R. § 201.111. If a motion to correct 

a manifest error of fact is filed by a party, then a party shall have twenty-one 

days to file a petition for review from the date of the order resolving such 

motion to correct a manifest error of fact. This initial decision will not 

become final until the Commission enters an order of finality. The 

Commission will enter an order of finality unless a party files a petition for 

review or motion to correct a manifest error of fact or the Commission 

determines on its own initiative to review the initial decision as to a party. If 

any of these events occur, the initial decision shall not become final as to that 

party.

A respondent has the right to file a motion to set aside a default within a 

reasonable time, stating the reasons for the failure to appear or defend and 

specifying the nature of the proposed defense. 17 C.F.R. § 201.155(b). The 

Commission can set aside a default at any time for good cause. Id.

_______________________________

Cameron Elliot

Administrative Law Judge

 

2 This order applies to all classes of Respondents’ securities registered 

under Section 12 of the Exchange Act, whether or not such securities are 

specifically identified by ticker symbol or otherwise in this initial decision.