John Kinross-Kennedy, age 85, of Irvine, California, was a CPA licensed in California. Kinross was registered with the PCAOB since 2005. As of July 15, 2013, Kinross was the independent public accountant for six public companies. During 2011 and 2012, Kinross issued six audit reports containing unqualified opinions. In each of these six audit reports, Kinross represented that he conducted his audits in accordance with PCAOB standards. Kinross failed, however, to conduct each of the six audits of the issuer’s financial statements in accordance with PCAOB standards. Kinross admitted to unfamiliarity with PCAOB requirements to perform certain auditing procedures, such as the annual written confirmation of his independence and communication with the predecessor auditor. He used outdated audit templates to document his audit planning and his performance of audit procedures, without any apparent effort to adapt those templates for subsequent changes in auditing standards. Kinross relied upon checklists for client acceptance, internal control evaluation, and transactional audit plans for small organizations that were published in 1993. That was the year he formed his audit practice and 10 years before the creation of the PCAOB. For one audit, Kinross instructed client personnel to select one invoice per month for the sample to be subjected to audit testing. He issued an unqualified opinion of one issuer’s financial statements as of March 31, 2010, and the period from March 31, 2009, to March 31, 2010, despite the fact that he had performed no audit procedures as of March 31, 2010, or for the period from March 31, 2009, to March 31, 2010. Kinross issued an audit report containing an unqualified opinion on another issuer’s August 31, 2011, financial statements. That issuer’s sole operating subsidiary accounted for 100 percent of the issuer’s revenues and cost of revenues and 15 percent of its expenses. Yet, Kinross performed no audit procedures on the subsidiary’s revenues or its expenses. The SEC brought an action against Kinross under SEC Rule of Practice 102(e). What was the outcome of that proceeding?