Showing posts with label INSIDER TRADING CASE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label INSIDER TRADING CASE. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 5, 2012

FORMER CEO OF OIL-AND-GAS COMPANY CHARGED BY SEC WITH PARTICIPATION IN AN INSIDER TRADING SCHEME

FROM: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SEC Charges Oil Company CEO as Source in Insider Trading Case

In November 28, 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced charges against the former CEO of a Denver-based oil-and-gas company at the center of an insider trading scheme that the SEC began prosecuting last month.

According to the SEC’s complaint, the insider trading occurred in advance of Delta Petroleum Corporation’s public announcement that Beverly Hills-based private investment firm Tracinda had agreed to purchase a 35 percent stake in the company, which shot its stock value up by nearly 20 percent. The SEC
initially charged insurance executive Michael Van Gilder for his illegal trading in the case, and is now additionally charging his source: Delta’s then-CEO Roger Parker.

The SEC’s amended complaint alleges that Parker, who lives in Englewood, Colo., illegally tipped his close friend Van Gilder and at least one other friend with confidential information about Tracinda’s impending investment. Despite his duty as CEO to protect nonpublic information, Parker repeatedly communicated with Van Gilder following meetings and other developments as the deal progressed. Parker also illegally tipped information about Delta’s quarterly earnings. The insider trading in this case generated more than $890,000 in illicit profits.

According to the SEC’s amended complaint filed in federal court in Denver, Parker tipped Van Gilder and another friend on several occasions in late November and December 2007 as the Tracinda investment was developing. Based on the inside information, Van Gilder and the other friend loaded up on Delta stock and highly speculative options contracts, and Van Gilder advised his relatives, his broker, and a co-worker to do the same.

The SEC alleges that the Tracinda announcement was not the only nonpublic information that Parker tipped to Van Gilder. In November 2007, Van Gilder received an e-mail from a mutual friend of Parker’s that included a news article expressing a negative view of Delta’s future prospects. After sending an e-mail to his broker indicating he might want to sell the Delta securities that he owned, Van Gilder called Parker three times that evening. Parker conveyed to Van Gilder confidential details about Delta’s third quarter 2007 earnings results that were to be announced later that week. Rather than sell his Delta stock, Van Gilder purchased an additional 1,250 shares and responded to the e-mail from the mutual friend by writing, "I had a dialogue with a friend, of whom you know. Do not sell this stock, rather buy more ... Delta will hit their numbers at this Thursday’s announcement." When Delta announced its earnings, it reported production and revenue numbers above the company’s previously stated guidance.

The SEC’s amended complaint charges Parker and Van Gilder with violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5. The amended complaint seeks a final judgment ordering them to disgorge their and their tippees’ ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest, ordering them to pay financial penalties, and permanently enjoining them from future violations of the above provisions of the federal securities laws. The SEC also seeks to prohibit Parker from acting as an officer or director of a public company.

Friday, November 23, 2012

CHARGES FILED IN SEC'S LARGEST EVER INSIDER TRADING CASE

Photo Credit:  SEC
FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

November 20, 2012

The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged Stamford, Conn.-based hedge fund advisory firm CR Intrinsic Investors LLC and its former portfolio manager along with a medical consultant for an expert network firm for their roles in a $276 million insider trading scheme involving a clinical trial for an Alzheimer's drug being jointly developed by two pharmaceutical companies. The illicit gains generated in this scheme make it the largest insider trading case ever charged by the SEC.

The SEC alleges that Mathew Martoma illegally obtained confidential details about the clinical trial from Dr. Sidney Gilman, who served as chairman of the safety monitoring committee overseeing the trial. Dr. Gilman was selected by Elan Corporation and Wyeth to present the final drug trial results to the public. In phone calls that were arranged by a New York-based expert network firm for which he moonlighted as a medical consultant, Dr. Gilman tipped Martoma with safety data and eventually details about negative results in the trial about two weeks before they were made public in July 2008. Martoma then caused several hedge funds to sell more than $960 million in Elan and Wyeth securities in just over a week.

Dr. Gilman, who lives in Ann Arbor, Mich., where he works as a medical school professor, has agreed to settle the SEC's charges and cooperate in this action and related SEC investigations. In a parallel action, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York today announced criminal charges against Martoma and a non-prosecution agreement with Dr. Gilman. Martoma lives in Boca Raton, Fla.

According to the SEC's complaint filed in federal court in Manhattan, Martoma first met Dr. Gilman through paid consultations arranged by the expert network firm. Dr. Gilman provided Martoma with material nonpublic information concerning the Phase II trial of the potential Alzheimer's drug called bapineuzumab (bapi). They coordinated their expert network consultations around scheduled safety monitoring committee meetings, and during their phone calls they discussed PowerPoint presentations made during the meetings and Dr. Gilman provided Martoma with his perspective on the results. Dr. Gilman developed a personal relationship with Martoma, eventually coming to view Martoma as a friend and pupil.

The SEC alleges that Martoma caused hedge funds managed by CR Intrinsic as well as hedge funds managed by an affiliated investment adviser to trade on the negative inside information he received from Dr. Gilman. Although Elan and Wyeth's shares rose on June 17, 2008, on the public release of top-line results of the Phase II trial, market participants were disappointed by the detailed final results issued on July 29, 2008. Double-digit declines in Elan and Wyeth shares ensued. After Martoma was tipped, the hedge funds not only liquidated their combined long position in Elan and Wyeth of more than $700 million, but went on to hold substantial short positions in both securities. This massive repositioning allowed CR Intrinsic and the affiliated advisory firm to reap approximately $82 million in profits and $194 million in avoided losses for a total of more than $276 million in illicit gains.

According to the SEC's complaint, Martoma received a $9.3 million bonus at the end of 2008 - a significant portion of which was attributable to the illegal profits that the hedge funds managed by CR Intrinsic and the other investment advisory firm had generated in this scheme. Dr. Gilman, who was generally paid $1,000 per hour as a consultant for the expert network firm, received more than $100,000 for his consultations with Martoma and others at the hedge fund advisory firms. Dr. Gilman also received approximately $79,000 from Elan for his consultations concerning bapi in 2007 and 2008.

The SEC's complaint charges each of the defendants with violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, and seeks a final judgment ordering them to disgorge their ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest, ordering them to pay financial penalties, and permanently enjoining them from future violations of these provisions of the federal securities laws.

Dr. Gilman has agreed to pay more than $234,000 in disgorgement and prejudgment interest. He also agreed to a permanent injunction against further violations of the federal securities laws. The proposed settlement is subject to approval by the court, which also will determine at a later date whether any additional financial penalty is appropriate.

Search This Blog

Translate

White House.gov Press Office Feed