CHINESE BUSINESSMAN AND WIFE AGREE TO SETTLE INSIDER TRADING CHARGES

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C., March 29, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that a Chinese businessman and his wife whose trading accounts were frozen last year as part of a major insider trading case have agreed to settle charges that they loaded up on the securities of Nexen Inc. while in possession of nonpublic information about an impending announcement that the company was being acquired by China-based CNOOC Ltd.

The SEC obtained an emergency court order in July 2012 to freeze multiple Hong Kong and Singapore-based trading accounts just days after the Nexen acquisition was announced and suspicious trading in Nexen stock was detected. The SEC’s complaint alleged that in the days leading up to the announcement, Hong Kong-based firm Well Advantage Limited and other unknown traders purchased Nexen stock based on confidential details about the acquisition.

The SEC’s investigation has identified Ren Feng and his wife Zeng Huiyu as previously unknown traders charged in the complaint as well as Ren’s private investment company CT Prime Assets Limited and four of Zeng’s brokerage customers on whose behalf she traded. They made a combined $2.3 million in illegal profits from Nexen stock trades made by Ren and Zeng.

The settlement, which is subject to court approval, requires the traders to pay more than $3.3 million combined.

"This settlement requires full disgorgement of the insider trading profits of this group of foreign traders, and Ren and Zeng must additionally pay sizeable penalties," said Sanjay Wadhwa, Senior Associate Director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office. "This should send a stern warning to anyone contemplating insider trading in U.S. markets from abroad that the SEC uncovers such misconduct and the end result is a severe financial setback rather than a windfall."

In October 2012, the SEC announced a settlement with Well Advantage, which agreed to pay more than $14.2 million to settle the insider trading charges. U.S. District Court Judge Richard J. Sullivan of the Southern District of New York approved that settlement.

This proposed settlement with Ren, Zeng, and the others also must be approved by Judge Sullivan.

Ren and CT Prime agreed to the entry of a final judgment requiring them to jointly pay disgorgement of their ill-gotten gains of $839,714.57 plus a penalty of $839,714.57, and permanently enjoining them from future violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5.

Zeng agreed to the entry of a final judgment requiring her to pay disgorgement of her ill-gotten gains of $202,030.22 plus a penalty of $202,030.22, and permanently enjoining her from future violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5.

Zeng also traded on behalf of four of her brokerage customers, who have agreed to disgorgement of the ill-gotten gains. Wong Chi Yu and her company Giant East Investments Limited agreed to jointly pay disgorgement of $641,057.94. Wang Wei agreed to pay disgorgement of $137,369.56. Wang Zhi Hua agreed to pay disgorgement of $466,169.15.

The defendants neither admit nor deny the SEC’s allegations.

The SEC’s investigation, which is continuing, has been conducted by Simona Suh, Charles D. Riely, Michael P. Holland, and Joseph G. Sansone of the Market Abuse Unit as well as Elzbieta Wraga and Aaron Arnzen of the New York Regional Office. The case has been supervised by Daniel M. Hawke and Sanjay Wadhwa. The SEC appreciates the assistance of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).

SEC CHARGES STATE OF ILLIONOIS WITH SECURITIES FRAUD

Map:  Illinois.  Credit:   Wikimedia Commons.  GNU. 

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C., March 11, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged the State of Illinois with securities fraud for misleading municipal bond investors about the state’s approach to funding its pension obligations.

An SEC investigation revealed that Illinois failed to inform investors about the impact of problems with its pension funding schedule as the state offered and sold more than $2.2 billion worth of municipal bonds from 2005 to early 2009. Illinois failed to disclose that its statutory plan significantly underfunded the state’s pension obligations and increased the risk to its overall financial condition. The state also misled investors about the effect of changes to its statutory plan.

Illinois, which implemented a number of remedial actions and issued corrective disclosures beginning in 2009, agreed to settle the SEC’s charges.

"Municipal investors are no less entitled to truthful risk disclosures than other investors," said George S. Canellos, Acting Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. "Time after time, Illinois failed to inform its bond investors about the risk to its financial condition posed by the structural underfunding of its pension system."

Elaine Greenberg, Chief of the SEC’s Municipal Securities and Public Pensions Unit, added, "Regardless of the funding methodology they choose, municipal issuers must provide accurate and complete pension disclosures including the effects of material changes to their pension plans. Public pension disclosure by municipal issuers continues to be a top priority of the unit."

According to the SEC’s order instituting settled administrative proceedings against Illinois, the state established a 50-year pension contribution schedule in the Illinois Pension Funding Act that was enacted in 1994. The schedule proved insufficient to cover both the cost of benefits accrued in a current year and a payment to amortize the plans’ unfunded actuarial liability. The statutory plan structurally underfunded the state’s pension obligations and backloaded the majority of pension contributions far into the future. This structure imposed significant stress on the pension systems and the state’s ability to meet its competing obligations – a condition that worsened over time.

The SEC’s order finds that Illinois misled investors about the effect of changes to its funding plan, particularly pension holidays enacted in 2005. Although the state disclosed the pension holidays and other legislative amendments to the plan, Illinois did not disclose the effect of those changes on the contribution schedule and its ability to meet its pension obligations. The state’s misleading disclosures resulted from various institutional failures. As a result, Illinois lacked proper mechanisms to identify and evaluate relevant information about its pension systems into its disclosures. For example, Illinois had not adopted or implemented sufficient controls, policies, or procedures to ensure that material information about the state’s pension plan was assembled and communicated to individuals responsible for bond disclosures. The state also did not adequately train personnel involved in the disclosure process or retain disclosure counsel.

According to the SEC’s order, Illinois took multiple steps beginning in 2009 to correct process deficiencies and enhance its pension disclosures. The state issued significantly improved disclosures in the pension section of its bond offering documents, retained disclosure counsel, and instituted written policies and procedures as well as implemented disclosure controls and training programs. The state designated a disclosure committee to assemble and evaluate pension disclosures. In reaching a settlement, the Commission considered these and other remedial acts by Illinois and its cooperation with SEC staff during the investigation. Without admitting or denying the findings, Illinois consented to the SEC’s order to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations of Sections 17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933.

The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Peter K. M. Chan along with Paul M. G. Helms in the Chicago Regional Office and Eric A. Celauro and Sally J. Hewitt in the Municipal Securities and Public Pensions Unit. They were assisted by other specialists in the unit including Joseph O. Chimienti, Creighton Papier, and Jonathan Wilcox.

EXECUTIVES SETTLE COMPENSATION FRAUD CASE WITH SEC

Credit:  U.S. Marshals Service

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

Executives to be Permanently Enjoined, to Pay Civil Penalties and Disgorgement, and to Reimburse Company Pursuant to Section 304 of Sarbanes-Oxley; Former CEO/Chairman also to be Barred for Five Years from Serving as an Officer and Director of any Public Company

The Securities and Exchange Commission today settled civil fraud charges against Amnon Landan, the former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Mercury Interactive, LLC (Mercury), and Douglas Smith, a former Chief Financial Officer of Mercury, arising from an alleged scheme to backdate stock option grants and from other alleged misconduct.

On May 31, 2007, the Commission charged Landan, Smith, and two other former senior Mercury officers with perpetrating a fraudulent and deceptive scheme from 1997 to 2005 to award themselves and other Mercury employees undisclosed, secret compensation by backdating stock option grants and failing to record hundreds of millions of dollars of compensation expense. The Commission's complaint also alleges that during this period Landan and certain other executives backdated stock option exercises, made fraudulent disclosures concerning Mercury's "backlog" of sales revenues to manage its reported earnings, and structured fraudulent loans for option exercises by overseas employees to avoid recording expenses.

Without admitting or denying the allegations in the Commission's complaint, Landan consented to the entry of a final judgment permanently enjoining him from violating and/or aiding and abetting violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, as well as the financial reporting, record-keeping, internal controls, false statements to auditors, and proxy provisions of the federal securities laws. Landan also agreed to be barred from serving as an officer or director of any public company for five years. Landan will pay $1,252,822 in disgorgement and prejudgment interest, representing the "in-the-money" benefit from his exercise of backdated option grants, and a $1,000,000 civil penalty. Pursuant to Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Landan will also reimburse Mercury, or the parent company that acquired it after the alleged misconduct (Hewlett-Packard Company), $5,064,678 for cash bonuses and profits from the sale of Mercury stock that he received in 2003. Under the terms of the settlement, Landan's Section 304 reimbursement would be deemed partially satisfied by his prior return to Mercury of $2,817,500 in vested options.

Without admitting or denying the allegations in the Commission's complaint, Smith consented to the entry of a final judgment permanently enjoining him from violating Section 17(a)(2) and (a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933. He will disgorge $451,200, representing the "in-the-money" benefit from his exercise of backdated option grants, and pay a $100,000 civil penalty. Pursuant to Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Smith will also reimburse Mercury or its parent company $2,814,687 for cash bonuses and profits from the sale of Mercury stock that he received in 2003. Under the terms of the settlement, all of Smith's disgorgement and all but $250,000 of his Section 304 reimbursement would be deemed satisfied by his prior repayment to Mercury of $451,200 and his foregoing of his right to exercise vested options with a value of $2,113,487.

The settlements are subject to the approval of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

The Commission previously filed settled charges in this matter against Mercury and three former outside directors of Mercury. On May 31, 2007, the Commission filed civil fraud charges against Mercury based on the stock option backdating scheme and other fraudulent conduct noted above. Mercury, which was acquired by Hewlett-Packard Company on Nov. 8, 2006, after the alleged misconduct, settled the matter by agreeing to pay a $28 million penalty and to be permanently enjoined. See Litigation Release No. 20136 (May 31, 2007). On September 17, 2008, the Commission filed settled charges against three former outside directors of Mercury alleging that they recklessly approved backdated stock option grants and reviewed and signed public filings that contained materially false and misleading disclosures about the company's stock option grants and company expenses. The outside directors settled the matter by consenting to permanent injunctions and the payment by each director of a $100,000 penalty. See Litigation Release No. 20724 (Sept. 17, 2008). Mercury and the outside directors settled the charges without admitting or denying the allegations in the Commission's complaint. The Commission also previously settled with one of the four senior officers its contested action. On March 20, 2009, the Commission settled with former Mercury CFO Sharlene Abrams by which she agreed to entry of a permanent injunction against the antifraud and certain other securities law provisions, to pay $2,287,914 in disgorgement which was deemed partially satisfied by payment to Mercury, to pay a $425,000 civil penalty, to be permanently barred from serving as an officer and director of any public company, and to a Commission order barring her from appearing or practicing before the Commission as an accountant. See Litigation Release No. 20964 (March 20, 2009). Abrams settled without admitting or denying the allegations in the Commission's complaint.

The Commission's litigation against one remaining Mercury officer, former general counsel Susan Skaer, is continuing.

INVESTMENT ADVISER LOCATED IN VIRGIN ISLANDS CHARGED WITH DEFRAUDING CLIENTS

Off The Island Of St. Thomas.  Credit:  CIA World Factbook.

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C., Feb. 21, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged an investment adviser located in the U.S. Virgin Islands with defrauding clients from whom he withheld the fact that he was receiving kickbacks for investing their money in thinly-traded companies. When he faced pressure to pay clients their returns on those investments, he allegedly used money from other clients in a Ponzi-like fashion to make payments.

The SEC’s Enforcement Division alleges that James S. Tagliaferri, through his St. Thomas-based firm TAG Virgin Islands, routinely used his discretionary authority over the accounts of his clients to purchase promissory notes issued by particular private companies. In exchange for financing those companies, TAG received millions of dollars in cash and other compensation — a conflict of interest that was never disclosed to investors. The Enforcement Division further alleges that when the promissory notes neared or passed maturity and his clients demanded payment, Tagliaferri misused assets of other clients to meet those demands.

"Tagliaferri was anything but forthcoming with his clients and he repeatedly failed to act in their best interests," said Andrew M. Calamari, Director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office. "He didn’t tell them about the compensation he received from the companies they were financing, and then compounded his fraud by using client assets to pay other clients when the conflicted investments came due."

In a parallel action, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York today announced criminal charges against Tagliaferri.

According to the SEC’s order instituting administrative proceedings, Tagliaferri invested TAG clients primarily in conservative and liquid investments such as municipal bonds and blue-chip stocks until around 2007, when he began investing clients in highly illiquid securities. These investments included promissory notes issued by various closely-held private companies that were nothing more than holding companies through which an individual and his family effected personal and business transactions. He also invested at least $40 million of clients’ money in notes of a private horse-racing company, International Equine Acquisitions Holdings, Inc.

According to the SEC’s order, TAG received more than $3.35 million and approximately 500,000 shares of stock of a microcap company in return for placing various investments with these companies. The compensation that TAG received from the companies for the investments that Tagliaferri made on behalf of his clients created a conflict of interest that he was required to disclose to investors.

The SEC’s Enforcement Division alleges that Tagliaferri then further defrauded clients by investing their funds in microcap and other thinly-traded public companies in order to raise at least $80 million to pay the interest or principal due to other clients on certain of the promissory notes. Tagliaferri explained in e-mails he sent in April 2010 to the individual behind the companies that the real motivation for investing TAG clients in one of his microcap companies was to use the proceeds to pay off other clients invested in the initial series of promissory notes. "Where is the $125MM. As you are aware, this money was earmarked to clear all of the notes and other issues facing us both," Tagliaferri wrote. He later added, the "shares you transferred are being sold to clients. With those proceeds, you’re buying back your own notes." TAG clients were unaware, however, that Tagliaferri’s true motivation for having them buy these stocks was to repay other TAG clients on other conflicted investments he had made for them.

According to the SEC’s order, Tagliaferri willfully violated Sections 17(a)(1) and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 thereunder, and Sections 206(1), 206(2) and 206(3) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.

The SEC’s investigation, which is continuing.

IRREGULAR OPTIONS TRADING IN FRONT OF H.J. HEINZ CO. ACQUSITION LEADS TO ASSET FREEZE

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C., Feb. 15, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today obtained an emergency court order to freeze assets in a Zurich, Switzerland-based trading account that was used to reap more than $1.7 million from trading in advance of yesterday’s public announcement about the acquisition of H.J. Heinz Company.

The SEC’s immediate action ensures that potentially illegal profits cannot be siphoned out of this account while the agency’s investigation of the suspicious trading continues.

In a complaint filed in federal court in Manhattan, the SEC alleges that prior to any public awareness that Berkshire Hathaway and 3G Capital had agreed to acquire H.J. Heinz Company in a deal valued at $28 billion, unknown traders took risky bets that Heinz’s stock price would increase. The traders purchased call options the very day before the public announcement. After the announcement, Heinz’s stock rose nearly 20 percent and trading volume increased more than 1,700 percent from the prior day, placing these traders in a position to profit substantially.

"Irregular and highly suspicious options trading immediately in front of a merger or acquisition announcement is a serious red flag that traders may be improperly acting on confidential nonpublic information," said Daniel M. Hawke, Chief of the Division of Enforcement’s Market Abuse Unit.

Sanjay Wadhwa, Senior Associate Director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office, added, "Despite the obvious logistical challenges of investigating trades involving offshore accounts, we moved swiftly to locate and freeze the assets of these suspicious traders, who now have to make an appearance in court to explain their trading if they want their assets unfrozen."

The SEC alleges that the unknown traders were in possession of material nonpublic information about the impending acquisition when they purchased out-of-the-money Heinz call options the day before the announcement. The timing and size of the trades were highly suspicious because the account through which the traders purchased the options had no history of trading Heinz securities in the last six months. Overall trading activity in Heinz call options several days before the announcement had been minimal.

The emergency court order obtained by the SEC freezes the traders’ assets and prohibits them from destroying any evidence. The SEC’s complaint charges the unknown traders with violating Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5. In addition to the emergency relief, the SEC is seeking a final judgment ordering the traders to disgorge their ill-gotten gains with interest, pay financial penalties, and be permanently barred from future violations.

The SEC’s expedited investigation is being conducted by Market Abuse Unit members Megan Bergstrom, David S. Brown, and Diana Tani in the Los Angeles Regional Office with substantial assistance from Charles Riely, Market Abuse Unit member in the New York Regional Office who will handle the SEC’s litigation. The SEC appreciates the assistance of the Options Regulatory Surveillance Authority (ORSA).

COURT ENTERS DEFAULT JUDGEMENT AGAINST PSYCHIC AND HIS COMPANIES

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Litigation Release No. 22619 / February 15, 2013
District Court Grants Securities and Exchange Commission's Motions for Default Judgment against a Nationally Known Psychic and his Corporate Entities in Multi-Million Dollar Offering Fraud


The Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) announced today that on February 11, 2013 the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered default judgments against Sean David Morton (Morton), a nationally-recognized psychic who bills himself as "America's Prophet," his wife, relief defendant Melissa Morton, and corporate shell entities co-owned by the Mortons. In addition to ordering permanent injunctions from violating antifraud and registration statutes and rule, each defendant was ordered to disgorge, jointly and severally, $5,181,135.82, along with prejudgment interest of $1,171,110.54, and pay a penalty of $5,181,135.82 for a total of $11,533,382.18. Relief defendants Melissa Morton and the Prophecy Research Institute, the Mortons' nonprofit religious organization, were ordered to disgorge $468,281 plus prejudgment interest of $105,847.23, for a total of $574,128.23.

On March 4, 2010, the Commission filed a civil injunctive action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York charging Morton and his corporate shell entities for engaging in a multi-million offering fraud. According to the Commission's complaint, Morton fraudulently raised more than $5 million from more than 100 investors for his investment group, which he called the Delphi Associates Investment Group (Delphi Investment Group).

Beginning in or around the summer of 2006, the complaint alleged, Morton solicited individuals to invest in one of several companies he and Melissa Morton controlled under the umbrella of the Delphi Investment Group. According to the Commission's complaint, Morton used his monthly newsletter, his website, his appearances on a nationally syndicated radio show called Coast to Coast AM, and appearances at public events, to promote his alleged psychic expertise in predicting the securities markets, and to solicit investors for the Delphi Investment Group. During these solicitations, Morton made numerous materially false representations. For example, Morton falsely told potential investors that he has called all the highs and lows of the stock market, on their exact dates, over a fourteen year period. Morton further falsely asserted that the alleged profits in the accounts were audited and certified by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PWC) who he claimed certified that the accounts had profited by 117%. Morton also falsely asserted that the investor funds would be used exclusively for foreign currency investments, and that any other use of the funds would be considered a criminal act. Morton further falsely claimed that he would use the pooled funds to trade in foreign currencies and distribute pro rata the trading profits among the investors. In private one-on-one correspondence with potential investors, Morton was even more aggressive in his solicitation. For example, Morton wrote to a potential investor urging he invest more money in the Delphi Investment Group "RIGHT NOW…[Because] [o]nce the DOLLAR starts to DROP, which will happen soon, we are set to make a FORTUNE!"

However, the complaint alleged, Morton lied to investors about his past successes, and about key aspects of the Delphi Investment Group, including the use of investor funds and the liquidity of the funds. According to the complaint, Morton did not have the successful track record picking stocks in which he claimed, and that he in fact was simply wrong in many of his securities predictions. Further, PWC never audited the Delphi Investment Group, let alone certify any profits. Also, unbeknownst to the investors, instead of investing all of the funds into foreign currency trading firms, the Mortons diverted some of the investor funds, including nearly half a million dollars to themselves through their own shell entities.

The defendants never properly answered the allegations in the complaint. Instead, the Mortons filed dozens of papers with the Court claiming, for instance, that the Commission is a private entity that has no jurisdiction over them, and that the staff attorneys working on the case do not exist.

On February 11, 2013, United States District Judge Forrest issued default judgments against all of the defendants and relief defendants. With the entry of the default judgments, the Commission received full relief requested in its complaint. The complaint charged each of the defendants with violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The complaint further charged that the relief defendants were unjustly enriched by receiving investor funds. The complaint sought a final judgment permanently restraining and enjoining the defendants from future violations of the above provisions of the federal securities laws.

The SEC's litigation team was led by Bennett Ellenbogen, Alexander Vasilescu, Todd Brody, Elzbieta Wraga, and Roshonda Ledbetter. Amelia Cottrell, Stephen Johnson, Jacqueline Fine, and Elizabeth Baier assisted during the investigation.

FINAL JUDGEMENT ENTERED IN INSIDER TRADING CASE

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Court Enters Final Judgments Against Former Wall Street Banker, Downstream Russian Trader and Trader’s Wife in Insider Trading Scheme


The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that on January 14, 2013, the Honorable Alvin K. Hellerstein of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a final judgment by default against defendant Alexander Vorobiev ("Vorobiev") and his wife, relief defendant Tatiana Vorobieva ("Vorobieva") (collectively, the "Vorobievs"), for their role in a serial scheme involving insider trading ahead of numerous health care-related acquisitions, tender offers, and other transactions.

Also, the Commission announced that on October 3, 2012, Judge Hellerstein entered a final judgment against Igor Poteroba ("Poteroba"), formerly an investment banker with UBS Securities LLC ("UBS"), who also had been charged in this matter with insider trading for misappropriating highly confidential inside information from UBS about those health care transactions and tipping that information to his friend, Aleksey Koval ("Koval"), also a financial professional, who, in turn, tipped Vorobiev.

The Commission's complaint, filed on March 24, 2010, alleges that, from at least July 2005 through February 2009, Poteroba, Koval, and Vorobiev participated in an insider trading ring that netted over $1 million in illicit profits. According to the complaint, Poteroba was the source of material, nonpublic information about eleven impending corporate transactions, which he obtained through his work as an investment banker in UBS's Global Healthcare Group. Poteroba misappropriated the material, nonpublic information from his employer and its clients in breach of duties of confidentiality that he owed them. Pursuant to the insider trading scheme as described in the complaint, Poteroba tipped defendant Koval, with the material, nonpublic information, and Koval, in turn, tipped his friend Vorobiev and placed trades through an account maintained by Vorobiev. The Commission's complaint alleges that both Koval and Vorobiev traded securities on the basis of that information. Because Vorobiev conducted some of the trading using his wife’s accounts, Vorobieva was named as a relief defendant.

Poteroba previously had been permanently enjoined from violating Sections 10(b) and 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 and Rule 14e-3 thereunder (see Litigation Release No. 21681 (Oct. 4, 2010)). On September 28, 2010, the Commission entered an order barring Poteroba from association with any broker, dealer, or investment adviser. In a parallel criminal proceeding, on December 21, 2010, Poteroba pleaded guilty to securities fraud and conspiracy to commit securities fraud.

The final judgment in the civil action against Poteroba found him liable for disgorgement in the amount of $416,336, representing profits obtained as a result of the conduct alleged in the Complaint, together with prejudgment interest in the amount of $49,071. The final judgment deemed these amounts satisfied by Poteroba’s payment of a forfeiture of $465,095 in a parallel criminal proceeding. No civil penalty was imposed on Poteroba in the final judgment. In the criminal proceeding, Poteroba had been sentenced to twenty-two months of imprisonment and ordered to pay a penalty of $25,000.

The Vorobievs failed to respond to the complaint and the Commission moved for entry of judgment by default. The final judgment in the civil action against Vorobiev: (1) permanently enjoined him from violations of Sections 10(b) and 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 and Rule 14e-3 thereunder; (2) found him liable for disgorgement in the amount of $146,541.20, representing profits obtained as a result of the conduct alleged in the Complaint, together with prejudgment interest in the amount of $21,389.80; and (3) imposed a civil penalty of $1,885,382.12, for a total judgment award of $2,053,313.73. In partial satisfaction of that award, the Court ordered that more than $220,000 in funds held in brokerage accounts in Vorobiev’s name, previously frozen by court order in the SEC’s action, be remitted to the SEC for transfer to the U.S. Treasury.

The final judgment against Vorobieva found her liable for disgorgement in the amount of $481,919.71, representing profits obtained as a result of the conduct alleged in the Complaint, together with prejudgment interest in the amount of $70,343.12, for a total judgment award of $552,262.83. In partial satisfaction of that award, the Court ordered that nearly $125,000 in funds held in brokerage accounts in Vorobieva’s name, also frozen by court order in the SEC’s action, be remitted to the SEC for transfer to the U.S. Treasury.

The Commission's civil action against defendant Koval remains pending before the Court.

SEC HALTS $150 MILLION INVESTMENT SCHEME TO DUPE FOREIGN INVESTORS AND EXPLOIT IMMIGRATION PROGRAM

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced charges and an asset freeze against an individual living in Illinois and two companies behind an investment scheme defrauding foreign investors seeking profitable returns and a legal path to U.S. residency through a federal visa program.

The SEC alleges that Anshoo R. Sethi created A Chicago Convention Center (ACCC) and Intercontinental Regional Center Trust of Chicago (IRCTC) and fraudulently sold more than $145 million in securities and collected $11 million in administrative fees from more than 250 investors primarily from China. Sethi and his companies duped investors into believing that by purchasing interests in ACCC, they would be financing construction of the "World’s First Zero Carbon Emission Platinum LEED certified" hotel and conference center near Chicago’s O’Hare Airport. Investors were misled to believe their investments were simultaneously enhancing their prospects for U.S. citizenship through the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Pilot Program, which provides foreign investors an avenue to U.S. residency by investing in domestic projects that will create or preserve a minimum number of jobs for U.S. workers.

The SEC alleges that Sethi and his companies falsely boasted to investors that they had acquired all the necessary building permits and that several major hotel chains had signed onto the project. They also provided falsified documents to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) – the federal agency that administers the EB-5 program – in an attempt to secure the agency’s preliminary approval of the project and investors’ provisional visas. Meanwhile, Sethi and his companies have spent more than 90 percent of the administrative fees collected from investors despite their promise to return this money to investors if their visa applications are denied. More than $2.5 million of these funds were directed to Sethi’s personal bank account in Hong Kong.

Swift coordination between the SEC and USCIS has brought the scheme to a halt in its application stage at USCIS. The SEC filed its complaint under seal earlier this week and obtained an emergency court order to protect the remaining $145 million in investor assets that were at risk of being similarly misappropriated by Sethi and his companies. The case was unsealed this morning.

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, the EB-5 program enables foreign investors to possibly qualify for a green card if they invest $1 million (or $500,000 in a "Targeted Employment Area" with a high unemployment rate) in a project that creates or preserves at least 10 jobs for U.S. workers, excluding the investor and his or her immediate family. Sethi and his companies used the lure of a pathway to U.S. citizenship to convince investors to wire a minimum of $500,000 apiece plus a $41,500 "administrative fee" to U.S. bank accounts. These administrative fees are separate from the investment capital that the EB-5 program requires to be deployed into a job-creating enterprise. More than $11 million in administrative fees were collected with the claim that they were fully refundable to investors if their visa applications are rejected. Sethi and his companies have instead been spending those funds.

The SEC alleges that Sethi submitted false claims about the project to USCIS. Among the phony documentation that he provided to the agency in seeking preliminary approval for the project under the EB-5 program were a comfort letter from Hyatt Hotels that was not genuine, and a false backup financing letter from the Qatar Investment Authority.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that Sethi and his companies made a number of misrepresentations about the project to dupe investors. Offering materials stated that investors’ funds would help build "a convention center and hotel complex, including convention and meeting space, five upscale hotels, and amenities including restaurants, lounges, bars, and entertainment facilities." Sethi and his companies prominently featured in their marketing materials the purported participation of three major hotel chains in the project: Hyatt, Intercontinental Hotel Group, and Starwood Hotels. However, none of these hotel chains have executed franchise agreements to include a brand hotel in this project as represented to investors in the offering materials. Two of the chains actually terminated prior deals with other Sethi-related entities more than two years before these offering materials were circulated to investors.

The SEC further alleges that the offering materials falsely stated that construction would begin in summer 2012 and occupancy of the first tower would occur in early spring 2014. A search of the Chicago Building Permits database for the project address shows that the only recent permits are for a tent for a purported groundbreaking ceremony held in November 2012, a demolition permit, construction of a fence, and a minor electrical wiring permit.

According to the SEC’s complaint, the 29-year-old Sethi misrepresented to investors in offering materials that he has "over fifteen years of experience in real estate development and management, specifically in the lodging area." Offering materials also misleadingly state that the project’s developer Upgrowth LLC has "more than 35 years of experience." Illinois corporate records show that Upgrowth was just recently organized in 2010.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that Sethi, ACCC, and IRCTC violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5. In addition to the temporary restraining order and asset freeze granted by the court, the SEC’s complaint seeks permanent injunctions and other monetary relief.

The SEC’s investigation, which is continuing, has been conducted by Mika M. Donlon and Adam J. Eisner under the supervision of C. Joshua Felker. Patrick M. Bryan will lead the litigation. The SEC acknowledges the substantial assistance of the USCIS.

SEC CHARGES INDIVIDUAL AND COMPANIES RELATING TO FRAUDULENT CITIZENSHIP SCHEME

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C., Feb. 8, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced charges and an asset freeze against an individual living in Illinois and two companies behind an investment scheme defrauding foreign investors seeking profitable returns and a legal path to U.S. residency through a federal visa program.

The SEC alleges that Anshoo R. Sethi created A Chicago Convention Center (ACCC) and Intercontinental Regional Center Trust of Chicago (IRCTC) and fraudulently sold more than $145 million in securities and collected $11 million in administrative fees from more than 250 investors primarily from China. Sethi and his companies duped investors into believing that by purchasing interests in ACCC, they would be financing construction of the "World’s First Zero Carbon Emission Platinum LEED certified" hotel and conference center near Chicago’s O’Hare Airport. Investors were misled to believe their investments were simultaneously enhancing their prospects for U.S. citizenship through the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Pilot Program, which provides foreign investors an avenue to U.S. residency by investing in domestic projects that will create or preserve a minimum number of jobs for U.S. workers.

The SEC alleges that Sethi and his companies falsely boasted to investors that they had acquired all the necessary building permits and that several major hotel chains had signed onto the project. They also provided falsified documents to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) — the federal agency that administers the EB-5 program — in an attempt to secure the agency’s preliminary approval of the project and investors’ provisional visas. Meanwhile, Sethi and his companies have spent more than 90 percent of the administrative fees collected from investors despite their promise to return this money to investors if their visa applications are denied. More than $2.5 million of these funds were directed to Sethi’s personal bank account in Hong Kong.

Swift coordination between the SEC and USCIS has brought the scheme to a halt in its application stage at USCIS. The SEC filed its complaint under seal earlier this week and obtained an emergency court order to protect the remaining $145 million in investor assets that were at risk of being similarly misappropriated by Sethi and his companies. The case was unsealed this morning.

"Sethi orchestrated an elaborate scheme and exploited these investors’ dream of earning legal U.S. residence along with a positive return on their investment in a project that was not nearly the done deal that he portrayed," said Stephen L. Cohen, Associate Director in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. "The good news is that working closely with USCIS, we intervened early and stopped him from getting very far, and the asset freeze preserves nearly all of the money invested."

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, the EB-5 program enables foreign investors to possibly qualify for a green card if they invest $1 million (or $500,000 in a "Targeted Employment Area" with a high unemployment rate) in a project that creates or preserves at least 10 jobs for U.S. workers, excluding the investor and his or her immediate family. Sethi and his companies used the lure of a pathway to U.S. citizenship to convince investors to wire a minimum of $500,000 apiece plus a $41,500 "administrative fee" to U.S. bank accounts. These administrative fees are separate from the investment capital that the EB-5 program requires to be deployed into a job-creating enterprise. More than $11 million in administrative fees were collected with the claim that they were fully refundable to investors if their visa applications are rejected. Sethi and his companies have instead been spending those funds.

The SEC alleges that Sethi submitted false claims about the project to USCIS. Among the phony documentation that he provided to the agency in seeking preliminary approval for the project under the EB-5 program were a comfort letter from Hyatt Hotels and a backup financing letter from the Qatar Investment Authority.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that Sethi and his companies made a number of misrepresentations about the project to dupe investors. Offering materials stated that investors’ funds would help build "a convention center and hotel complex, including convention and meeting space, five upscale hotels, and amenities including restaurants, lounges, bars, and entertainment facilities." Sethi and his companies prominently featured in their marketing materials the purported participation of three major hotel chains in the project: Hyatt, Intercontinental Hotel Group, and Starwood Hotels. However, none of these hotel chains have executed franchise agreements to include a brand hotel in this project as represented to investors in the offering materials. Two of the chains actually terminated prior deals with other Sethi-related entities more than two years before these offering materials were circulated to investors.

The SEC further alleges that the offering materials falsely stated that construction would begin in summer 2012 and occupancy of the first tower would occur in early spring 2014. A search of the Chicago Building Permits database for the project address shows that the only recent permits are for a tent for a purported groundbreaking ceremony held in November 2012, a demolition permit, construction of a fence, and a minor electrical wiring permit.

According to the SEC’s complaint, the 29-year-old Sethi misrepresented to investors in offering materials that he has "over fifteen years of experience in real estate development and management, specifically in the lodging area." Offering materials also misleadingly state that the project’s developer Upgrowth LLC has "more than 35 years of experience." Illinois corporate records show that Upgrowth was just recently organized in 2010.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that Sethi, ACCC, and IRCTC violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5. In addition to the temporary restraining order and asset freeze granted by the court, the SEC’s complaint seeks permanent injunctions and other monetary relief.

The SEC’s investigation, which is continuing, has been conducted by Mika M. Donlon and Adam J. Eisner under the supervision of C. Joshua Felker. Patrick M. Bryan will lead the litigation. The SEC acknowledges the substantial assistance of the USCIS.

THREE CHARGED WITH FRAUD IN ALLEGED CHARITABLE GIFT ANNUITY SCHEME

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SEC Charges We The People, Inc., of The United States and Three Individuals In Offering Fraud Scheme

On February 4, 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in connection with an offering fraud conducted by We The People, Inc. of the United States ("We The People"), a purported charitable organization based in Tallahassee, Florida.

In its complaint against Richard Olive, We The People’s former chief of program services, and Susan Olive, We The People’s former chief of finance and administration, the Commission alleges that the Olives, husband and wife, orchestrated a fraudulent scheme that raised more than $75 million from approximately 450 investors located across the United States, most of whom were senior citizens. Investors were solicited to transfer assets to We The People in exchange for what it called a charitable gift annuity. The Commission alleges that We The People – through the Olives – lured investors by making various false and misleading statements regarding, among other things, the value of the products sold and the safety and security of the investments. The complaint also alleges that the Olives failed to disclose to investors indictments and regulatory sanctions issued against them for fraudulently selling similar products. In addition to the misrepresentations, the Commission alleges that the Olives misappropriated investor funds for personal use.

The complaint alleges that, based on this conduct, Richard and Susan Olive violated, or aided and abetted the violation of, Sections 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act"), and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The complaint also claims that the Olives violated Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act, and Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act. The Commission seeks that the Olives be permanently enjoined, and be ordered to pay disgorgement plus pre- and post-judgment interest, and third-tier civil money penalties.

In addition, the Commission filed settled actions against We The People and William Reeves, We The People’s in-house counsel. Without admitting or denying the Commission’s allegations, We The People consented to a final judgment providing injunctive relief under Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act, and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, disgorgement, and the appointment of a receiver to protect the more than $60 million of investor assets still held by We The People.

Without admitting or denying the Commission’s allegations, Reeves consented to a final judgment providing injunctive relief under Sections 5(a), 5(c), 17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, and providing that the Court will determine issues relating to the imposition of a civil money penalty against him at a later date. Reeves also agreed to a suspension from appearing or practicing before the Commission as an attorney, with the right to apply for reinstatement after 5 years. Reeves entered into a cooperation agreement with the Commission, and the terms of his settlement reflect his assistance in the Commission’s investigation and anticipated cooperation in its pending enforcement action.

SEC CHARGES HUSBAND AND WIFE WITH DEFRAUDING SENIOR CITIZENS WITH CHARITY SCHEME

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C., Feb. 4, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a husband and wife who raised millions of dollars selling investments for a purported charitable organization in Tallahassee, Fla., while defrauding senior citizens and significantly exaggerating the amount of contributions actually made to charity.

The SEC alleges that after Richard K. Olive and Susan L. Olive were hired at We The People Inc., the organization obtained $75 million from more than 400 investors in Florida, Colorado, and Texas among more than 30 states across the country by selling an investment product they described as a charitable gift annuity (CGA). However, the CGAs issued by We The People differed in several ways from CGAs issued legitimately, namely that they were issued primarily to benefit the Olives and other third-party promoters and consultants. Only a small amount of the money raised was actually directed to charitable services. Meanwhile the Olives received more than $1.1 million in salary and commissions, and they also siphoned away investor funds for their personal use.

The SEC further alleges that the Olives lured elderly investors with limited investing experience into the scheme by making a number of false representations about the purported value and financial benefits of We The People’s CGAs. The Olives also lied about the safety and security of the investments.

"The Olives raised millions from senior citizens by claiming that We The People’s so-called CGAs provided attractive financial benefits and were re-insured and backed by assets held in trust," said Julie Lutz, Associate Director of the SEC’s Denver Regional Office. "Investors were not given the full story about the true value and security of their investments."

According to the SEC’s complaint against the Olives filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, investors were coaxed to transfer assets including stocks, annuities, real estate, and cash to We The People in exchange for a CGA. We The People claimed to operate as a non-profit organization while it was offering the CGAs from June 2008 to April 2012. However, We The People was not operating as a charity but instead for the primary purpose of issuing CGAs and using the proceeds to pay substantial sums to the Olives, third-party promoters, and consultants. On rare occasions when We The People did actually direct money raised toward charitable services, it was insignificant. For instance, the organization made public statements that it donated $21.8 million in relief aid to AIDS orphans in Zambia, but in fact the supplies were donated by others and We The People merely made a small payment to the third party that was shipping the supplies.

The SEC alleges that We The People’s marketing and promotional materials for the CGA offering contained misrepresentations and omissions including:
False statements that the CGAs were worth the "full" accumulated value of the assets transferred by investors to We The People. Investors were not told in advance of transferring their assets that the value of the CGA as calculated by We The People was always substantially less than the "full" accumulated value of those assets because We The People took a significant percentage of the asset’s value and kept it as a purported "charitable gift."

False statements about the safety and security of the CGA program including that We The People held in trust a reserve equal to 110 percent of its liabilities and that it "reinsured" its products through "highly rated" commercial insurance companies. We The People did not in fact have any restricted-access trust accounts let alone maintain a reserve in them, and it did not purchase reinsurance from any insurance company to cover its potential liabilities under the CGAs.
Omissions of the previous indictments and regulatory sanctions against Richard and Susan Olive when they previously sold similar products.
Omissions of the sizable commissions that We The People paid to third-party promoters and the Olives on the sale of the CGAs, hiding from investors that these commissions totaled several million dollars.
The SEC’s complaint charges the Olives with violations, or aiding and abetting violations, of the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws as well as violations of the securities and broker-dealer registration provisions of the federal securities laws. The SEC is seeking disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus pre- and post-judgment interest and financial penalties against the Olives.

The SEC also filed separate complaints today against We The People as well as the company’s in-house counsel William G. Reeves. They both agreed to settle the charges without admitting or denying the allegations. The settlements are subject to court approval.

We The People consented to a final judgment that will enable the appointment of a receiver to protect more than $60 million of investor assets still held by the company. The final judgment also provides for disgorgement of ill-gotten gains and provides injunctive relief under the antifraud and registration provisions of the federal securities laws.

Reeves entered into a cooperation agreement with the SEC, and the terms of his settlement reflect his assistance in the SEC’s investigation and anticipated cooperation in its pending action against the Olives. Reeves agreed to be suspended from appearing or practicing before the SEC for at least five years, and consented to a final judgment providing injunctive relief under the provisions of the federal securities laws that he violated. The court will determine at a later date whether a financial penalty should be imposed against Reeves.

The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Michael Cates and Ian Karpel in the Denver Regional Office. The SEC’s litigation against the Olives will be led by Nicholas Heinke and Dugan Bliss.

SEC CHARGES DAY TRADER WITH PROVIDING FALSIFIED BROKERAGE RECORDS TO INVESTORS



Credit:  SEC

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C., Jan 29, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a day trader in Sugar Land, Texas, with defrauding investors in his supposed high-frequency trading program and providing them falsified brokerage records that drastically overstated assets and hid his massive trading losses.

The SEC alleges that Firas Hamdan particularly targeted fellow members of the Houston-area Lebanese and Druze communities, raising more than $6 million during a five-year period from at least 33 investors. Hamdan told prospective investors that he would pool their investments with his own money and conduct high-frequency trading using a supposed proprietary trading algorithm. Hamdan promised annual returns of 30 percent and assured investors that his program was safe and proven when in reality it was a dismal failure, generating $1.5 million in losses. As he failed to deliver the promised profits, Hamdan told investors that his funds were tied up in the Greek debt crisis and the MF Global bankruptcy among other phony excuses.

The SEC is seeking an emergency court order to halt the scheme and freeze Hamdan’s assets and those of his firm, FAH Capital Partners.

"Hamdan’s affinity scam preyed upon people’s tendency to trust those who share common backgrounds and beliefs," said David R. Woodcock, Director of the SEC’s Fort Worth Regional Office. "Hamdan raised money by creating the aura of a successful day trader among friends and family in his community, and he continued to mislead them and hide the truth while trading losses mounted."

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Houston, Hamdan is well-known in the Lebanese and Druze communities in the Houston area and is a former treasurer of the Houston branch of the American Druze Society. Hamdan found investors for his trading program by talking with his friends and family in these communities. As word spread about his purported trading success, he asked existing investors to solicit their friends for investments.

The SEC alleges that Hamdan misrepresented to investors that he generated positive returns in 59 of 60 months between 2007 and 2012. He showed them phony documentation to support his false claims. For instance, a purported brokerage statement he provided investors for the first quarter of 2010 showed an opening balance of more than $2.3 million with quarterly trading gains of $2.7 million for a closing balance above $5.1 million. An actual brokerage statement obtained by SEC investigators for Hamdan’s account during that same period shows the opening balance at just $27,970.76 and the closing balance at $148,210.02, with quarterly trading losses of $7,452.80.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Hamdan made several other false claims to potential investors. For instance, he lied about the existence of a cash reserve account that secured their investments. Hamdan falsely stated that investments were further secured by a $5 million "key-man" insurance policy. He also falsely claimed that a well-known hedge fund manager in the Dallas area made a million-dollar investment with him and promised to invest more based on Hamdan’s continuing success.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that Hamdan violated the antifraud provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint seeks various relief including a temporary restraining order, preliminary and permanent injunctions, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains with prejudgment interest, and financial penalties.

The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Jonathan Scott, Timothy Evans, and Mark Pittman of the Fort Worth Regional Office. Bret Helmer will lead the SEC’s litigation.

FLORIDA FINANCIAL ADVISER CHARGED BY SEC WITH TIPPING INSIDE INFORMATION

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C., Jan. 25, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a financial adviser in Boca Raton, Fla., with illegally tipping inside information he learned about the upcoming sale of a pharmaceutical company in exchange for $35,000 and a jet ski dock.

The SEC alleges that Kevin L. Dowd got details about the impeding acquisition of Princeton, N.J.-based Pharmasset Inc. by California-based Gilead Sciences from one of his supervisors at the brokerage firm where he worked. The supervisor learned about the deal from a customer who sat on Pharmasset’s board of directors. Dowd, who knew the customer, breached his duty to keep the information confidential by tipping a friend in the penny stock promotion business who bought Pharmasset stock on the last trading day before the public announcement of the deal. The trader also tipped another individual who bought Pharmasset call options, and collectively they made $708,327 in illicit insider trading profits in just two trading days. The SEC’s investigation is continuing.

The SEC alleges that Dowd profited from the scheme in a roundabout way, receiving the jet ski dock from his tippee and a cashier’s check for $35,000, which he used for expensive upgrades to a pool at his home.

"As an industry professional, Dowd surely knew what he was doing was wrong, but he incorrectly thought that his scheme was clever enough to avoid detection by investigators," said Daniel M. Hawke, Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s Market Abuse Unit. "Professionals in the securities industry or any sector should know that you’ll be held accountable for violating insider trading laws, even if you don’t trade the securities yourself."

In a parallel action, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey today announced criminal charges against Dowd.

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in New Jersey, the Pharmasset director told Dowd’s supervisor in confidence as his financial adviser that Pharmasset was going to be sold and the price would be in the high $130s per share. Dowd’s supervisor provided Dowd with the information along with an instruction that he was restricted from trading or recommending Pharmasset securities. Despite the warning, Dowd tipped his penny stock promoter friend, who wired $196,000 into a brokerage account with a zero balance and bought 2,700 shares of Pharmasset stock on Friday, Nov. 18, 2011. Dowd’s friend tipped another individual who bought 100 out-of-the-money call options, which are securities that derive their value from the underlying common stock of the issuer and give the purchaser the right to buy the underlying stock at a specific price within a specified time period. Investors typically purchase call options when they believe the value of the underlying securities is going up.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Gilead and Pharmasset announced the acquisition on Monday, November 21. Dowd’s tippees immediately sold all of their Pharmasset securities to obtain their illegal profits.

The SEC alleges that Dowd violated Sections 10(b) and (14)(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 and 14e-3 thereunder. The SEC is seeking disgorgement of ill-gotten gains with prejudgment interest, a financial penalty, and a permanent injunction against Dowd.

The SEC’s investigation is being conducted by Market Abuse Unit staff Mary P. Hansen, Paul T. Chryssikos, and John S. Rymas in the Philadelphia Regional Office. The litigation will be handled by G. Jeffrey Boujoukos and Christopher R. Kelly. The SEC has coordinated its action with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey, and appreciates the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Options Regulatory Surveillance Authority.

TWO FORMER EXECUTIVES OF VOLT INFORMATION SCIENCES, INC., CHARGED WITH SECURITIES FRAUD

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
SEC Charges Volt Information Sciences, Inc. and Two Former Officers with Securities Fraud

The Securities and Exchange Commission yesterday filed civil injunctive complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in connection with improper accounting at Volt Information Sciences, Inc. ("Volt" or the "Company"), a company located in New York, New York.

In its complaint against Jack J. Egan, Jr. Volt’s former Chief Financial Officer, the Commission alleges that Egan participated in a scheme to materially overstate revenue. For Volt’s fourth quarter and fiscal year ended October 28, 2007, Egan signed and filed financial statements reporting $7.55 million of revenue that had not been earned and was not recognizable under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The $7.55 million of improper revenue caused Volt’s net income for its fourth quarter and fiscal year ended October 28, 2007, to be materially overstated. The complaint further alleges that the scheme relied on fabricated paperwork purporting to be a contract selling software to a customer. Egan knew that any sale of the software was impossible because Volt intended to lease the same software to the same customer the following year. Nevertheless, Egan authorized that the $7.55 million in improper revenue be included in the Company’s consolidated income statement for 2007, which were included in Volt’s: (1) 2007 Form 10-K filed with the Commission on January 11, 2008, as amended by Form 10-K/A filed with the Commission on February 25, 2008; and (2) earnings release on Form 8-K furnished to the Commission on December 20, 2007. Egan signed the fraudulent 2007 Form 10-K and subsequent SEC filings that included the same overstatement of revenue. In addition, the complaint alleges that Egan mislead Volt’s external auditors and he signed one or more certifications required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act that were false and misleading.

The Commission’s complaint charges Egan with violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act"); Sections 10(b) and 13(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act"); and Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 13b2-1, 13b2-2, and 13a-14. The complaint further charges Egan with aiding and abetting violations by the Company. The Commission seeks that Egan be permanently enjoined, be ordered to pay a civil money penalty, and be prohibited from acting as an officer or director.

In addition to the complaint against Egan, the Commission filed a settled civil action against Volt and Debra L. Hobbs ("Hobbs"), the former chief financial officer of the Volt subsidiary where the fraud originated. Without admitting or denying the complaint's allegations, Volt agreed to be enjoined from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act , and Sections 10(b),13(a), 13(b)(2)(A), and 13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, 13a-1, and 13a-11. The Company cooperated during the Commission’s investigation and has undertaken significant remediation efforts.

A WIN AGAINST DEFENDANTS CHARGED WITH DEFRAUDING INVESTORS WITH FICTITIOUS OFFERINGS

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
On December 17, 2012, the United States District Court for the Central District of California granted the Securities and Exchange Commission's motion for summary judgment against all defendants and relief defendants in a civil action arising from two "prime bank" or "high yield" investment schemes that defrauded investors out of more than $11 million. The judgment permanently enjoins Francis E. Wilde, Steven E. Woods, Mark A. Gelazela, Bruce H. Haglund, and entities they control, from violations of the antifraud and other securities law provisions. The judgment also requires the defendants to pay disgorgement and penalties, and bars Wilde and Haglund from acting as officers or directors of any public company. In addition, the court issued a separate judgment requiring relief defendants IBalance LLC, Maureen Wilde, and Shillelagh Capital Corporation to disgorge illegally-obtained profits.

The Commission's complaint, filed on February 24, 2011, alleged that Wilde, through his company Matrix Holdings LLC, orchestrated two fraudulent investment schemes. The first scheme began in April 2008 when Wilde obtained a U.S. Treasury bond with a market value of nearly $5 million from an investor by making false and misleading promises of outsized returns from what he claimed was a "private placement program." Wilde (through Matrix) then used the bond to secure a line of credit that he drew down to pay personal expenses, to pay investors, creditors and debt holders of his public company, and to make failed attempts to acquire fictitious prime bank instruments or to invest in high yield programs. Wilde eventually exhausted all of the funds obtained with the investor's bond and never produced a return for the investor.

The Commission further claimed that, beginning in October 2009, Wilde concocted another fraudulent scheme with Woods and Gelazela in the form of a "bank guarantee funding" program using the services of Haglund as escrow attorney. Between October 2009 and mid-March 2010, Woods (through BMW Majestic LLC) and Gelazela (through IDLYC Holdings Trust ("IDLYC") and IDLYC Holdings Trust LLC ("IDLYC LLC")) signed contracts with 24 investors who sent over $6.3 million to Haglund's trust account. Wilde never successfully acquired or leased a single legitimate financial instrument and exhausted all $6.3 million of the investors' funds, much of which was taken by the defendants in the form of undisclosed fees. The Commission alleged that Haglund aided the fraud by receiving and sending wires of investors' funds in and out of his trust account according to instructions from Wilde, thus allowing Wilde to utilize funds for undisclosed purposes. Haglund also knowingly made, and Wilde knowingly authorized, Ponzi-like payments to old investors using new investor deposits.

The court found that Wilde, Woods, Gelazela, Matrix, BMW Majestic, IDLYC, and IDLYC LLC violated Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; that Woods and Gelazela also violated Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act; and that Haglund and Wilde aided and abetted the other defendants' violations of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5.

The judgment permanently enjoins Wilde, Woods, Gelazela, Matrix, BMW Majestic, IDLYC, and IDLYC LLC from violating Sections 5 and 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; Woods and Gelazela from violating Section 15(a)(1) of the Exchange Act; and Haglund from violating Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The court ordered Wilde and Matrix to pay, jointly and severally, disgorgement of their ill-gotten gains in the amount of $12,106,810.75 plus pre-judgment interest, for a total of $13,589,505.56. The court further ordered Wilde and Matrix to pay a civil penalty equal to the amount of disgorgement plus prejudgment interest. In addition, the court ordered Woods, Gelazela, Haglund, BMW Majestic, IDLYC and IDLYC LLC to pay, jointly and severally, disgorgement of their ill-gotten gains in the amount of $6,195,908 plus pre-judgment interest, for a total of $6,744,083.49. The court's order also required Woods, Gelazela, Haglund, BMW Majestic, IDLYC and IDLYC LLC to pay a civil penalty equal to the amount of disgorgement plus prejudgment interest. The judgment also permanently bars Wilde and Haglund from acting as an officer or director of a public company.

The court also ordered several relief defendants, all of which are related to defendants, to disgorge a total of $2,153,000 in ill-gotten gains that they received:
IBalance LLC, an entity partially owned by Gelazela, was ordered to pay disgorgement of $1,000,000, plus prejudgment interest of $88,743.79;
Maureen Wilde, the wife of Francis Wilde, was ordered to pay disgorgement of $829,500, plus prejudgment interest of $67,412.85; and
Shillelagh Capital Corporation, an entity Wilde controls, was ordered to pay disgorgement of $323,500, plus prejudgment interest of $27,475.06.
　
　

MAKING MATERIAL MISTATEMENTS DURING FINANCIAL CRISIS

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SEC Charges Three Former Senior Officers of Commonwealth Bank With Understating Losses and Material Misstatements During Financial Crisis
The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged three former bank executives in Virginia for understating millions of dollars in losses and masking the true health of the bank's loan portfolio at the height of the financial crisis.

The SEC alleges that Edward J. Woodard, Jr., who was the CEO, President and Chairman of the Board at Norfolk, Virginia-based Bank of the Commonwealth and its publicly-traded parent, Commonwealth Bankshares, along with Chief Financial Officer and Secretary Cynthia A. Sabol, a CPA, and Executive Vice President and Commercial Loan Officer Stephen G. Fields understated the bank's loan-related losses as well as losses on real estate repossessed by the bank (other real estate owned or OREO).

The SEC's complaint alleges that, from in or about November 2008 through August 2010, the consistent message in Commonwealth's SEC filings and public statements was that its portfolio of loans, which comprised approximately 94% and 81% of the company's total assets in 2008 and 2009, respectively, was conservatively managed according to strict underwriting standards aimed at keeping Commonwealth's reserved losses low during a time of unprecedented economic turmoil. In reality, internal practice deviated so much from what the investing public was told that, from November 2008 through August 2010, Commonwealth understated its ALLL by approximately 17% to 25% with a corresponding understatement to its reported loss before income taxes for fiscal year 2008 of approximately 64%; understated its OREO in two quarters by approximately 19% to 20%, which resulted in a corresponding understatement of Commonwealth's reported loss before income taxes in the first quarter of 2010 of approximately 35%; and underreported its total non-performing loans throughout the entire period by at least 30%.

The SEC's complaint further alleges that Woodard, as CEO, knew of the true state of Commonwealth's loan portfolio, was involved in the activity to hide the deterioration of many of the loans at issue and was responsible for the misleading public statements and in particular those in earnings releases. Sabol, as CFO, knew of the activity to mask the problems with the company's loan portfolio and the corresponding effect these masking practices had on the bank's financial statements and disclosures, yet signed the disclosures and certified to the investing public that they were accurate. Fields oversaw the bank's largest portfolio of construction and development loans and was involved in the masking practices.

TWO KPMG AUDITORS CHARGED FOR FAILURE TO FIND HIDDEN LOAN LOSSES

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SEC Charges Two KPMG Auditors for Failed Audit of Nebraska Bank Hiding Loan Losses During Financial Crisis

Washington, D.C., Jan. 9, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged two auditors at KPMG for their roles in a failed audit of a Nebraska-based bank that hid millions of dollars in loan losses from investors during the financial crisis and eventually was forced to file for bankruptcy.

The SEC previously charged three former TierOne Bank executives responsible for the scheme. Two executives agreed to settle the SEC’s charges, and the case continues against the other.

The new charges in the SEC’s case are against KPMG partner John J. Aesoph and senior manager Darren M. Bennett. The SEC’s investigation found that they failed to appropriately scrutinize management’s estimates of TierOne’s allowance for loan and lease losses (known as ALLL). Due to the financial crisis and problems in the real estate market, this was one of the highest risk areas of the audit, yet Aesoph and Bennett failed to obtain sufficient evidence supporting management’s estimates of fair value of the collateral underlying the bank’s troubled loans. Instead, they relied on stale information and management’s representations, and they failed to heed numerous red flags when issuing unqualified opinions on TierOne’s 2008 financial statements and the bank’s internal controls over its financial reporting.

"Aesoph and Bennett merely rubber-stamped TierOne’s collateral value estimates and ignored the red flags surrounding the bank’s troubled real estate loans," said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. "Auditors must adhere to professional auditing standards and exercise due diligence rather than merely relying on management’s representations."

According to the SEC’s order instituting administrative proceedings against Aesoph, who lives in Omaha, and Bennett, who lives in Elkhorn, Neb., the auditors failed to comply with professional auditing standards in their substantive audit procedures over the bank’s valuation of loan losses resulting from impaired loans. They relied principally on stale appraisals and management’s uncorroborated representations of current value despite evidence that management’s estimates were biased and inconsistent with independent market data. Aesoph and Bennett failed to exercise the appropriate professional skepticism and obtain sufficient evidence that management’s collateral value and loan loss estimates were reasonable.

According to the SEC’s order, the internal controls identified and tested by the auditing engagement team did not effectively test management’s use of stale and inadequate appraisals to value the collateral underlying the bank’s troubled loan portfolio. For example, the auditors identified TierOne’s Asset Classification Committee as a key ALLL control. But there was no reference in the audit work papers to whether or how the committee assessed the value of the collateral underlying individual loans evaluated for impairment, and the committee did not generate or review written documentation to support management’s assumptions. Given the complete lack of documentation, Aesoph and Bennett had insufficient evidence from which to conclude that the bank’s internal controls for valuation of collateral were effective.

The SEC’s order alleges that Aesoph and Bennett engaged in improper professional conduct as defined in Section 4C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 102(e)(1)(ii) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice. A hearing will be scheduled before an administrative law judge to determine whether the allegations contained in the order are true and what, if any, remedial sanctions are appropriate pursuant to Rule 102(e). The administrative law judge will issue an initial decision no later than 300 days from the date of service of the order.

The SEC’s investigation of the auditors was led by Mary Brady and Michael D’Angelo of the Denver Regional Office. Barbara Wells and Nicholas Heinke will lead the Enforcement Division’s litigation in the administrative proceeding.

FINAL JUDGMENT ENTERED AGAINST DEFENDANT IN RHODE ISLAND-BASED OFFERING FRAUD

Credit:  Wikimedia..

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today the resolution of an enforcement action filed by the Commission on October 19, 2010 in federal district court in Rhode Island against defendants David G. Stern and Online-Registries, Inc. (d/b/a Online Medical Registries) ("OMR") and relief defendant Michele Ritter. The court entered final judgment by consent against Stern on December 5, 2012 and entered a stipulation of dismissal of the claims against the relief defendant on December 27, 2012. The court previously had entered a final judgment by default against OMR on September 25, 2012.

The Commission's complaint alleged that Stern and OMR made false and misleading statements to investors in OMR, a web-based company founded and controlled by Stern, in connection with investors' purchase of stock in OMR. The misrepresentations generally related to OMR's business ventures, the status of its technology, its number of customers, and Stern's personal background, consisting of disbarment from the practice of law and a prior criminal conviction in federal district court in Massachusetts relating to financial wrongdoing. Based upon these and other allegations, including the misuse of investor funds, the Commission obtained a temporary restraining order and asset freeze on October 20, 2010, and a stipulated preliminary injunction on February 28, 2011 against Stern and OMR. On April 3, 2012, the court held Stern in contempt for violations of the preliminary injunction.

Without admitting or denying the allegations in the Commission's complaint, Stern agreed to the entry of a final judgment that: (i) permanently enjoins him from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act") and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; (ii) holds him liable for disgorgement of $197,875, representing amounts received as a result of the conduct alleged in the Commission's complaint, together with prejudgment interest thereon in the amount of $27,800.71, for a total of $225,675.71; and (iii) waives the payment of disgorgement and prejudgment interest and does not impose a civil penalty based upon the representations in Stern's sworn statement of financial condition. The final judgment by default entered against OMR (i) enjoins OMR from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder and (ii) orders OMR to pay disgorgement of $197,875 and prejudgment interest in the amount of $24,997.22. The Commission had initially charged that relief defendant Michele Ritter received some investor funds from Stern and sought the return of those funds. The Commission has now agreed to dismiss its charges against relief defendant Michele Ritter.

THE SEC AND THE GOLD MINE

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

The Securities and Exchange Commission today filed fraud charges against a California-based mining company and its CEO who induced hundreds of investors to pour $16 million into a fruitless gold mining venture.

The SEC alleges that Nekekim Corporation and Kenneth Carlton defrauded investors with representations that a special "complex ore" found at Nekekim's mine site in Nevada contained gold deposits worth at least $1.7 billion. Carlton highlighted test results produced by two small labs that used unconventional methods to test the ore for gold, but he withheld from investors other tests conducted by different firms that suggested the Nekekim mine site held little if any gold. The small labs' reliability also had been called into doubt by geologists and a government study. Yet as Nekekim failed to produce any mining revenue, Carlton gave shareholders false hope that the company was close to perfecting the custom method it supposedly needed to extract gold from its special ore.

Carlton agreed to settle the SEC's charges.

According to the SEC's complaint filed in federal court in Fresno, Calif., Nekekim succeeded in attracting investors from 2001 to 2011 in such U.S. states as California, Florida, and New Jersey as well as foreign countries including Canada, Australia, and Singapore. Carlton falsely represented to investors that a "physicist" who in reality had no scientific training helped develop a confidential gold extraction technique licensed by Nekekim. Carlton also promoted a series of other supposedly promising extraction methods in frequent reports to shareholders. In one newsletter, he touted: "A NEW GOLD RECOVERY PROCESS IS SUCCESSFUL." As each of these methods actually failed, Carlton's reports grossly overstated Nekekim's progress toward profitability while prompting shareholders to invest more money in the company.

Carlton, who lives in Clovis, Calif., agreed to a judgment requiring him to pay a $50,000 penalty and prohibiting him from selling securities for Nekekim or managing the company. He also will be prohibited from further violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Nekekim, based in Madera, Calif., agreed to a judgment prohibiting the same violations and requiring disclosure of these sanctions in any offering of securities for the next three years. Carlton and Nekekim neither admitted nor denied the SEC's allegations.

This case was investigated by Thomas Eme and Tracy Davis of the SEC's San Francisco office.