Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective April 21, 2006

Mr. Feldman was convicted on his plea of guilty to grand theft by embezzlement, a felony. Mr. Feldman also was convicted on his plea of guilty to filing a false tax return, a felony.

The circumstances of the first felony conviction are that between January 1, 1999, and August 1, 2001, while Mr. Feldman was a president, manager, and accountant for Lindsey Studios, Inc., he transferred from Lindsey Studios, Inc.'s business checking account to his personal checking account, approximately $380,000 during the period 1999-2001.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (a), (c), (g), (i), (j), and (k). California Code of Regulation, Title 16, Division 1, § 65.

Accusation filed.

Surrendered certificate, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Fiedelman is required to reimburse the Board $5,143 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Effective April 22, 2005

Amended Accusation No. AC-2004-32 includes a charge that the SEC, in an administration proceeding alleged that Mr. Fiedelman engaged in improper professional conduct in connection with Deloitte and Touche's audit of The North Face, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1997, and Deloitte's review of The North Face, Inc.'s 10-Q filing for the quarter ended March 31, 1998.

As a result of the above, Mr. Fiedelman was suspended from appearing or practicing as an accountant before the SEC.

Amended Accusation No. AC-2004-32 includes an additional charge that Mr. Fiedelman did not report to the California Board of Accountancy that the SEC informed Mr. Fiedelman of his opportunity to make a "Wells submission."

Solely for purposes of settlement, Mr. Fiedelman understands that at a hearing, a factual basis for the charges in the Accusation could be established and that those charges, if proven, would constitute cause for discipline of his CPA license. Mr. Fiedelman does not admit the charges. However, he understands that in the unlikely event that he should reapply for licensure, the charges are deemed admitted.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5063, and 5100 (g), (h) and (l).

License revoked by default decision.

Effective August 6, 1995

On or about October 7, 1992, in Municipal Court in Los Angeles County, Respondent was convicted of one count of grand theft by embezzlement of $69,400.00, a felony.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100(a).

Via default decision, Applicant/Respondent is barred from admittance to future CPA examinations in California until further order of the Board, commencing with the November 2001 examination.

Applicant/Respondent is denied credit for passing any portion of the CPA examination to date.

Applicant/Respondent shall not be given credit for passing any portion of the CPA examination in any future examination taken in California or any other jurisdiction until further order of the Board.

Applicant/Respondent shall be barred from licensure as a Certified Public Accountant until further order of the Board.

Applicant/Respondent may petition the Board for relief no sooner than three years from the effective date of this decision.

Effective October 12, 2001

Statement of Issues SI-2002-1 contains allegations that Ms. Finkbeiner sat for the November 2000 and May 2001 CPA exams and on both occasions sat next to another examinee who was a social and business acquaintance. The Statement of Issues further alleges that Ms. Finkbeiner aided her social/business acquaintance by allowing him to copy off her answer sheets.

Business and Professions Code, Division 1, Chapter 1, § 123(b), Division 1.5, Chapter 2, § 480(a) and Chapter 5, § 496, and Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100(a), 5110, 5111, and 5112.

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective February 24, 2006

Mr. Fiore pleaded guilty to one felony count of attempting to evade or defeat tax for calendar year 1999. For calendar year 1999, Mr. Fiore understated the business receipts from his law practice in the amount of $473,978 and also failed to report payments from his law partner for the partial sale of his law practice. This understatement resulted in Mr. Fiore reporting federal taxable income of $214,828, rather than the correct federal taxable income of $737,422, and he paid federal income tax of $65,184, rather than the correct federal income tax of $279,604.

Mr. Fiore eventually paid restitution of $626,623, which represented the total amount of federal income taxes alleged to have been evaded for the years 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (a), (i), and (j).

Revocation stayed, with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Fisher and Fisher & Bagley shall at all times maintain active license status with the Board.

Mr. Fisher shall complete 24 hours of continuing professional education courses (CPE) in audit-related subjects, at least eight hours of which shall include instruction on audits of employee benefit plans. The CPE shall be in addition to the 80 hours required for license renewal.

Prior to release of any audit by Mr. Fisher or Fisher & Bagley, all work papers and audited financial statement for or pertaining to any such audit must be reviewed and approved by an independent certified public accountant approved by the Board or its representatives.

Mr. Fisher and Fisher & Bagley are jointly required to reimburse the Board $6,357 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Also See:

Baka, John Edward

Fisher, George Alan

For purposes of settlement, Mr. Fisher admits he was the engagement partner for Fisher & Bagley and participated in the audit of the IES-ESOP for the year ended March 31, 2002, supervising the work of John Edward Baka.

For purposes of settlement, both Mr. Fisher and Fisher & Bagley admit the working paper documentation of the tests performed in support of the audit of the IES-ESOP for the year ended March 31, 2002, was characterized by extreme departures from applicable professional standards, constituting gross negligence and/or repeated acts of negligence.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (c).

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective May 2, 1997

Respondent had been appointed by the Tehama County Superior Court to be the trustee of a trust bank account. In her capacity as trustee, she absconded with money from the trust bank account. Respondent was subsequently convicted of grand theft of personal property, a felony.

Respondent's license expired on February 1, 1994; however, she continued to hold out as a CPA. On June 28, 1995, Respondent represented to an undercover operator that she was a licensed CPA.

Business and Professions Code, Division 1, Chapter 1, §118(b), Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5050, 5055, 5100, 5100(c), (h), and (j). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 3, 99, 99(a), and (c).

Revocation stayed, with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Fisher and Fisher & Bagley shall at all times maintain active license status with the Board.

Mr. Fisher shall complete 24 hours of continuing professional education courses (CPE) in audit-related subjects, at least eight hours of which shall include instruction on audits of employee benefit plans. The CPE shall be in addition to the 80 hours required for license renewal.

Prior to release of any audit by Mr. Fisher or Fisher & Bagley, all work papers and audited financial statement for or pertaining to any such audit must be reviewed and approved by an independent certified public accountant approved by the Board or its representatives.

Mr. Fisher and Fisher & Bagley are jointly required to reimburse the Board $6,357 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Effective October 20, 2006

Also See:

Fisher & Bagley

Baka, John Edward

For purposes of settlement, Mr. Fisher admits he was the engagement partner for Fisher & Bagley and participated in the audit of the IES-ESOP for the year ended March 31, 2002, supervising the work of John Edward Baka.

For purposes of settlement, both Mr. Fisher and Fisher & Bagley admit the working paper documentation of the tests performed in support of the audit of the IES-ESOP for the year ended March 31, 2002, was characterized by extreme departures from applicable professional standards, constituting gross negligence and/or repeated acts of negligence.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (c).

Accusation filed.

Mr. Flattum's application for licensure is denied, via proposed decision.

Effective May 18, 2004

On March 8, 1993, Mr. Flattum was convicted of several crimes including securities fraud, money laundering, and filing false statements.

Mr. Flattum's crimes involved dishonesty and are substantially related to the qualifications, functions, and duties of a certified public accountant.

Business and Professions Code, Division 1.5, Chapter 2, § 480 and Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5110(a).

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective March 8, 1998

Reinstated March 31, 2000

On or about April 3, 1996, a citation was issued to Respondent. Respondent failed to comply with the citation. As a result, Respondent's certificate was subject to discipline for unprofessional conduct.

Business and Professions Code § 5100(f). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 95.4.

In the interest of justice, no discipline was imposed.

Effective August 24, 2002

Also See:

KPMG LLP

McBride, Margaret Jean

Parker, Joseph Horton

Timon, Bradley Jay

In the performance of the audit of the 1993 financial statements of Orange County, Mr. Freedman failed to perform his duties with respect to audit testing and documentation of compliance with investment laws and regulations and failed to gain an understanding of internal control structure.

Mr. Freedman also failed to properly plan and supervise staff auditors in the 1993 engagement, and he failed to maintain the proper level of professional skepticism regarding management representations.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5062, and 5100 (c) and (f).

Revocation stayed, with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Frick shall take and pass with a score of 90 percent or better a Board approved ethics course.

Mr. Frick is required to reimburse the Board $15,000 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms of probation.

Effective April 21, 2006

Also See:

Ernst & Young LLP

Mr. Frick admits the following matters in Accusation AC-2004-37. Mr. Frick, a partner at Ernst and Young LLP (EY), was the engagement partner during EY's audits of the financial statements of PeopleSoft, Inc. Mr. Frick was responsible for signing EY's audit reports and issuing the auditor's opinions (which were unqualified) on PeopleSoft's financial statements for the year ended December 31, 1995, through the year ended December 31, 1999. Mr. Frick also was EY's coordinating partner for PeopleSoft, from the fall of 1995 until June 2000.

Mr. Frick further admits that the following matters charged, if proven at hearing, constitute violations of the Accountancy Act as charged and provide the basis for the Board's discipline of his license. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) found that Ernst and Young LLP was not independent in fact and appearance when it audited PeopleSoft's financial statement for FY's 1994 through 1999, because EY's business relationships with PeopleSoft and actions by EY's Consulting Group created an impermissible identify or mutality of interests. The SEC found that Mr. Frick's conclusions regarding EY's independence were contradicted by evidence known by, or available to, Mr. Frick during the course of his audit procedures.

Accusation No. AC-2004-37 alleged that Mr. Frick's lack of appropriate consideration and resolution of the independence issue in the PeopleSoft audits constituted violations of the Board's regulations requiring independence and compliance with professional standards. Mr. Frick issued, or caused to be issued, reports in the EY audits that failed to conform to professional standards.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5062 and 5100 (g). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 58 and 65.

Related Documents:

Ernst and Young Action