Is there any meaningful substantial argument which

Is there any meaningful substantial argument which can be made against the company filing an audited 10-K document to the SEC before submitting a Form 10 to be registered by the SEC???

First let us consider another related example...

Can paralytics "walk"?
To "walk" is defined as, the ability to "...move at a regular and fairly slow pace by lifting and setting down each foot in turn, never having both feet off the ground at once."
To be paralyzed means a "Cause (a person or part of the body) to become partly or wholly incapable of movement"
so logically we could conceive that to "walk" is to "move" and paralytics cannot "move" therefore they cannot "walk" but this is an oversimplification.
It merely takes one example to show that even though it can be logically sound in some cases it is not necessarily true in all cases.

It is fact that Roosevelt was totally and permanently paralyzed from the waist down though
fitting his hips and legs with iron braces, he laboriously taught himself to walk a short distance by swiveling his torso while supporting himself with a cane, thereby "walking", thus some paralytics can "walk" which means that not all paralytics are not able to walk, some can walk but some cannot so asking the question, "can paralytics walk?", does not have a Yes/No True/False answer.
I would hardly think it wise or meaningful to complain about a paralytic "walking" and screaming at them that "paralytics cannot walk" should they hint at an attempt to walk. It is possible and if they so desire to "walk" then it can be accomplished.

Can RFMK have the option to file an audited 10-K with audited financials to the SEC before the Form 10 is sent in to the SEC?
Yes.
Are audited financials required before sending in the Form 10?
No.
Are audited financials required along with a registration made "effective" by the SEC within a certain amount of time?
Yes.

Feel free to search for "Form 10-SB" and download the PDF form itself, in it you will find the following requirements.

The Form 10-SB
("GENERAL FORM FOR REGISTRATION OF SECURITIES
OF SMALL BUSINESS ISSUERS
Under Section 12(b) or (g) of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934")

"... Regardless of
the disclosure model used, all registrants shall also complete Parts II and III, and furnish the financial statements
required by Part F/S ."

" PART F/S
Furnish the information required by Item 310 of Regulation S-B . However, if audited financial statements
of the registrant and its predecessors and the financial statements required to be provided for any significant
business acquired or to be acquired are not otherwise available for each of the two most recent fiscal years, only
the financial statements for the latest fiscal year must be audited ."

Further info :

http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm#ipo
Some useful info can be found in the section labeled, "SEC staff review of registration statements".

Regulation S-B Item 310 ("Financial Statements")
http://www.law.uc.edu/sites/default/files/CCL...SB310.html

" Annual Financial Statements. Small business issuers shall file an audited balance sheet as of the end of the most recent fiscal year ... "

" Development Stage Companies. A registrant in the development stage must provide cumulative from inception financial information . "

Also reference, "Age of Financial Statements", which basically states that w ithin a certain window of time the up-to-date audited financials must
be filed along with the SEC registration . So, the exact timing of sending in the SEC registration submission (Form 10SB) is irrevelant , the company
can either decide to send it in early along with unaudited financials but then have to update (amend) those financials with audited interim financial filings, OR, they can just simply provide up-to-date audited financials along with a Form 10SB submission to make the process smoother and aid the SEC
to provide a favorable outcome for the issuers registration process. 

As a shareholder, it actually makes me quite BULLISH on RFMK knowing that the CEO understands that the SEC does not look favorably on the sorted past of the likes of a non-reporting micro cap like RFMK and thus will need that much more convincing to get RFMK past the scrutiny placed upon it by the SEC.  I should think that up-to-date audited financial reports would go a long way in giving the SEC NO EXCUSE to not make the eventual registration "effective". Judging by the long time taken to get the financials audited all the way through 2012, IMO it was a wise choice to wait on submitting the Form 10 because if they would have submitted it in say December, by now with UNaudited 2012 financials (Q4 10Q filing) and even if the registration would have been accepted and made "effective", without up-to-date AUDITED financials that registration would or could have been revoked and then it would have been a disaster for the company to re-apply. Just food for thought. Even if they would have been able to get the financials audited in time, they would have had to AMEND the financials submitted with the Form 10 anyway in order for everything to be good with the SEC. So IMO it does not make much sense complaining about management as regards the timing or exact sequence in which they follow the process for getting fully reporting and eventually uplisted. Simply ridiculous. LOL 

http://www.law.uc.edu/sites/default/files/CCL...sec12.html
"Procedure for registration"
" profit and loss statements for not more than the three preceding fiscal years, certified if required by the rules and regulations of the Commission by a registered public accounting firm; and ...any further financial statements which the Commission may deem necessary or appropriate for the protection of investors. "

http://www.law.uc.edu/sites/default/files/CCL...c13.html#a
Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Section 13(a) ("Reports by issuer of security; contents") Item 2

" such annual reports (and such copies thereof), certified if required by the rules and regulations of the Commission by independent public accountants, and such quarterly reports (and such copies thereof), as the Commission may prescribe . "

Also note,

Section 13 ("Periodical and Other Reports") Item "i" ("Accuracy of Financial Reports")

Do or do not, there is no try. <=== It seems RFMK management knows and understands this concept very well!

GLTA

$RFMK