Hopes Advance Project "In-Pit" Measured and Indicated Iron Resource Increases by 250% to 1.268 Billion Tonnes

Oceanic Iron Ore Corp. (TSX VENTURE:FEO)(OTCQX:FEOVF) (the "Company", "Oceanic")
has received the results of an updated resource estimate prepared by Micon
International Limited ("Micon") under the direction of Eddy Canova, the
Company's Director of Exploration and a Qualified Person, in respect of the
Hopes Advance Project Area ("Hopes Advance").


In-Pit Mineral Resources:



--  1.268 billion tonnes of measured and indicated in-pit resource at 32.3 %
    total iron with a 38.7 % crude to concentrate weight recovery at a total
    iron cut-off of 25% increasing the resource by 250% above the November
    2011 published resource 
--  720.7 million tonnes of measured in-pit resource at 32.4 % total iron
    with a 38.8 % crude to concentrate weight recovery at a total iron cut-
    off of 25% 
--  547.5 million tonnes of indicated in-pit resource at 32.3 % total iron
    with a 38.6 % crude to concentrate weight recovery at a total iron cut-
    off of 25% 
--  193.4 million tonnes of inferred in-pit resource at 32.9 % total iron
    with a 38.8 % crude to concentrate weight recovery at a total iron cut-
    off of 25% 
--  Updated resource is based on 67 twinned and 43 exploration step - out
    holes drilled between March and October 2011 
--  Results from step-out holes suggest that mineralization extends in a
    number of deposit areas, in particular Castle Mountain, Iron Valley, and
    Bay Zone. 
--  Represents a substantial increase in volume and confidence in quality of
    Hopes Advance resource when compared to initial resource estimate
    published in November 2011



Steven Dean, Chairman and CEO added: "The updated in - pit resource estimate
increases both the size and quality of the resource base at Hopes Advance and
supports the case that the Company could produce the "optimal" case production
of 20 million tonnes per annum over a mine life of almost 25 years as described
in the Company's Preliminary Economic Assessment from November 2011(i). With an
updated measured and indicated in pit resource that has increased over 250%
since the date of our original resource estimate, Hopes Advance would be ranked
as one of the largest producers globally, not including both the potential to
further extend the resource base in key deposits at Hopes Advance and further
additional tonnage suggested through the historic resource work done in the
Roberts Lake and Morgan Lake project areas."


(i) "Technical Report on the Mineral Resource Estimate and Results of the
Preliminary Economic Assessment - Hopes Advance Bay Iron Deposits Ungava Bay
Region, Quebec, Canada" dated November 4, 2011, available on SEDAR and on the
Company's website, www.oceanicironore.com.




Table 1 - Updated In-Pit Mineral Resource Estimate for Hopes Advance
                          (at a 25% Fe cut-off)                   
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    
Classification                  Tonnes    Fe (%)  Concentrate Tonnes
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured                   720,765,000      32.4         279,806,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Indicated                  547,518,000      32.3         211,516,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------
M+I                      1,268,283,000      32.3         491,322,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Inferred                   193,403,000      32.9          75,112,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have            
    demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may 
    be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, 
    socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.                  
(2) The mineral resources presented here were estimated using a block model 
    with parent blocks of 50 m by 50 m by 15 m sub-blocked to a minimum size
    of 25 m by 25 m by 1 m and using ID3 methods for grade estimation. A    
    total of 10 individual mineralized areas were identified and each       
    estimated into a separate block model. Given the continuity of the iron 
    assay values, no top cuts were applied. All resources are reported using
    an iron cut-off of 25% within Whittle optimization pit shells and a     
    mining recovery of 100%.                                                
(3) The quantity and grade of reported inferred resources in this estimation
    are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to  
    define these inferred resources as an indicated or measured mineral     
    resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in      
    upgrading them to an indicated or measured mineral resource category.   
(4) The mineral resources in this press release were estimated using the    
    Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM       
    Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines 
    prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and       
    adopted by CIM Council November 27, 2010.                               



Resource Verification Fieldwork

The 2011 resource verification and drilling program at Hopes Advance consisted
of 115 drill holes with 11,581 metres of NQ calibre drilling. 67 holes were
twins of historic drill holes and 43 holes were exploration holes, which
extended mineralization on Castle Mountain, West Zone, Iron Valley, and the Bay
Zone. Based on the results from the exploration drilling, the Company believes
there is potential to increase the resource base at Hopes Advance with
additional exploration drilling at Castle Mountain, West Zone, and the Bay Zone.
Airborne magnetics suggest additional drilling at Castle Mountain could extend
mineralization 600 m to 1200 m to the northeast The Northwest Zone and Iron
Plateau are currently untested.


Ore Characterization

Ore characterization tests were conducted by the Company in order to identify
that part of the mineral resource that could provide sufficient weight recovery
and iron recovery and produce concentrate with marketable characteristics. The
results of the ore characterization testing were considered in the
classification of material in the resource estimate.


Approximately 630 composite samples from all drill holes at Hopes Advance were
analyzed by SGS Mineral Services, Lakefield, Ontario. The composites were
analyzed using Mozley tables to simulate recovery by a gravity circuit followed
by Davis tube tests to simulate recovery by low intensity magnet separators
(LIMS) in a concentrating plant when sufficient magnetite was present in the
Mozley table tails. The thoroughness of the metallurgical ore characterization
has increased the Company's confidence in the classification of material in the
resource estimate.


The Company expects to provide a detailed analysis of the results from the 630
composite samples in the coming weeks.


Updated Resource Estimate

Ten different mineralized areas were identified at Hopes Advance for inclusion
into the updated resource estimate. These areas included Castle Mountain, the
West Zone, Iron Valley, and the Bay Zone.


To view Figure 1 - Geological Map of Hopes Advance, visit the following link:
http://media3.marketwire.com/docs/HAmap402.jpg


Table 2 below sets out the overall global mineral inventory comprising all
material within the block model of each deposit above a cut-off grade of 25%
iron, compared to the initial global mineral inventory disclosed in November
2011.




Table 2 - Hopes Advance Global Mineral Inventory Comparison
                      (at a 25% Fe cut-off)                               
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    April, 2012                     November, 2011         
          ------------------------------------------------------------------
Classifi-                       Concentrate                      Concentrate
 cation           Tonnes Fe (%)      Tonnes        Tonnes Fe (%)      Tonnes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured     857,258,000   32.3 331,754,000             -      -           -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indicated    724,707,000   32.1 278,473,000   461,533,000   32.0 177,541,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
M+I        1,581,965,000   32.2 610,227,000   461,533,000   32.0 177,541,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inferred     269,399,000   32.6 103,390,000 1,030,455,000   32.3 401,004,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) The tonnes and grade presented above are global in nature and do not    
    reflect conceptual open pit shells or detailed designs.                 



A separate block model was developed for each mineralized area. Grades were
estimated using inverse distance cubed interpolation. The resource model is
stratigraphic in nature and during resource estimation an unfolding technique
was used to ensure that iron grades tracked along the stratigraphy. Mozley table
and Davis tube test results were used to predict weight recovery based on head
iron for each deposit. Whittle pit shells were developed for each zone using the
economic assumptions summarized below. The resulting pit shells for each zone
were used to constrain the mineral resource estimate reported in Table 1. The
overall strip ratio for this In-Pit resource is 0.86 to 1 and is based on the
conceptual pit shells. Conceptual pit shells do not include designed ramps and
berms. The iron formation out-crops in most areas and would allow mining to
begin with very little stripping. Furthermore, the iron formation is shallowly
dipping in most zones which would allow mining to continue with a relatively low
stripping ratio. At Castle Mountain the shallowly dipping iron formation could
be mined along strike over 4.5 km.




Table 3 - Hopes Advance Whittle Economic Pit Optimization Assumptions 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Item                                         Units                   $
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mining Cost                       $/t all material                2.71
Process Cost                          $/t resource               14.87
Pipeline                               $/t product                1.08
Port                                   $/t product                3.00
Camp                                   $/t product                1.50
G&A                                    $/t product                1.50
Royalty                                          %                 2.0
Concentrate Value                      $/t product                 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------



Table 4 provides a comparison of the updated resource estimate with the previous
resource estimate, and shows an increase in measured and indicated resources.
Higher confidence reflected in the resource is based on consistency of total Fe
assay results and newly completed composite test work results for head iron and
weight recovery. The overall measured and indicated in-pit resource reported in
April 2012 has increased by 250% compared to what was previously reported in
November 2011.




Table 4 - Hopes Advance In-Pit Resource Comparison (at a 25% Fe cut-off)    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        April, 2012                     November, 2011      
          ------------------------------------------------------------------
Classifi-                       Concentrate                      Concentrate
 cation           Tonnes Fe (%)      Tonnes        Tonnes Fe (%)      Tonnes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured     720,765,000   32.4 279,806,000             -      -           -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indicated    547,518,000   32.3 211,516,000   358,362,000   31.8 136,894,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
M+I        1,268,283,000   32.3 491,322,000   358,362,000   31.8 136,894,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inferred     193,403,000   32.9  75,112,000   872,423,000   32.4 340,136,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have            
    demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may 
    be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, 
    socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.                   
(2) The mineral resources presented here were estimated using a block model 
    with parent blocks of 50 m by 50 m by 15 m sub-blocked to a minimum size
    of 25 m by 25 m by 1 m and using ID3 methods for grade estimation. A    
    total of 10 individual mineralized areas were identified and each       
    estimated into a separate block model. Given the continuity of the iron 
    assay values, no top cuts were applied. All resources are reported using
    an iron cut-off of 25% within Whittle optimization pit shells and a     
    mining recovery of 100%.                                                
(3) The quantity and grade of reported inferred resources in this estimation
    are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to  
    define these inferred resources as an indicated or measured mineral     
    resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in      
    upgrading them to an indicated or measured mineral resource category.   
(4) The mineral resources in this press release were estimated using the    
    Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM       
    Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines 
    prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and       
    adopted by CIM Council November 27, 2010.                               



Results from the updated resource estimate show that the current work has
continued to expand the previously reported resource for each deposit, and the
Company believes that further expansion is likely. This is primarily due to the
fact that the Company has identified a number of instances where mineralization
continues along the trough trend or down dip that were not considered economic
in the historic resource estimates.


Resource Statement

The mineral resource estimates in this press release use the Canadian Institute
of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), Standards on Mineral Resources and
Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines prepared by CIM Standing Committee on
Reserve Definitions and adopted by CIM Council on November 27, 2010. The mineral
resource estimates provided in this report are classified as "measured",
"indicated", or "inferred" as defined by CIM.


According to the CIM definitions, a Mineral Resource must be potentially
economic in that it must be "in such form and quantity and of such grade or
quality that it has reasonable prospects for economic extraction". For the Hopes
Advance iron deposit, an iron cut-off grade was assigned based on economic
assumptions and metallurgical parameters and was used in the resource
estimations. Resources reported in this press release use an estimated potential
open pit iron cut-off of 25% total iron content.


Eddy Canova, P.Geo. (Q403), the Exploration Manager for the Company and a
Qualified Person as defined by NI 43-101, has reviewed and is responsible for
the technical information contained in this news release.


The complete report in respect of the updated resource estimate will be filed on
SEDAR and on the Company's website within 45 days of this news release.


OCEANIC IRON ORE CORP. (www.oceanicironore.com)

On behalf of the Board of Directors

Steven Dean, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

This news release includes certain "Forward-Looking Statements" as that term is
used in applicable securities law. All statements included herein, other than
statements of historical fact, including, without limitation, statements
regarding potential mineralization and resources, exploration results, and
future plans and objectives of Oceanic Iron Ore Corp. ("Oceanic", or the
"Company"), are forward-looking statements that involve various risks and
uncertainties. In certain cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by
the use of words such as "plans", "expects" or "does not expect", "scheduled",
"believes", or variations of such words and phrases or statements that certain
actions, events or results "potentially", "may", "could", "would", "might" or
"will" be taken, occur or be achieved. There can be no assurance that such
statements will prove to be accurate, and actual results could differ materially
from those expressed or implied by such statements. Forward-looking statements
are based on certain assumptions that management believes are reasonable at the
time they are made. 


In making the forward-looking statements in this presentation, the Company has
applied several material assumptions, including, but not limited to, the
assumption that: (1) there being no significant disruptions affecting
operations, whether due to labour/supply disruptions, damage to equipment or
otherwise; (2) permitting, development, expansion and power supply proceeding on
a basis consistent with the Company's current expectations; (3) certain price
assumptions for iron ore; (4) prices for availability of natural gas, fuel oil,
electricity, parts and equipment and other key supplies remaining consistent
with current levels; (5) the accuracy of current mineral resource estimates on
the Company's property; and (6) labour and material costs increasing on a basis
consistent with the Company's current expectations. Important factors that could
cause actual results to differ materially from the Company's expectations are
disclosed under the heading "Risk Factors" in the Company's Filing Statement
dated November 22, 2010 (a copy of which is publicly available on SEDAR at
www.sedar.com under the Company's profile) and elsewhere in documents filed from
time to time, including MD&A, with the Toronto Stock Exchange and other
regulatory authorities. Such factors include, among others, risks related to the
ability of the Company to obtain necessary financing and adequate insurance; the
economy generally; fluctuations in the currency markets; fluctuations in the
spot and forward price of iron ore or certain other commodities (e.g., diesel
fuel and electricity); changes in interest rates; disruption to the credit
markets and delays in obtaining financing; the possibility of cost overruns or
unanticipated expenses; employee relations. Accordingly, readers are advised not
to place undue reliance on Forward-Looking Statements. Except as required under
applicable securities legislation, the Company undertakes no obligation to
publicly update or revise Forward-Looking Statements, whether as a result of new
information, future events or otherwise.