This Week In Securities Litigation

by Dorsey & Whitney LLP
Contact

Robert Jackson and Hester Peirce were sworn in as Commissioners yesterday by Chairman Clayton. Mr. Jackson joined the agency from NYU School of law where he was a professor. Ms. Peirce was at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University were she was a Senior Research Fellow and Director of the Financial Markets Working Group. The Commission now has five commissioners.

SEC Enforcement – Litigated Actions

SEC v. Jones, Civil Action No. 17-11226 (D. Mass. Opinion Jan. 5, 2018). Defendant Cheryl Jones was named as a defendant. The complaint alleged she sold unregistered and worthless securities in the Bridge Fund, a Ponzi scheme operated by her brother Mark Jones. Mr. Jones created and operated the Bridge Fund from 2007 through 2015. The fund promised returns from using investor money to extend short-term “bridge loans” to Jamaican companies that had been approved for commercial bank loans but were in need of cash until the bank loans closed. In fact Mr. Jones took the investor cash. When the fund failed he pleaded guilty and was sentenced to serve seventy months in prison. He defaulted in an SEC enforcement action.

The SEC then filed an enforcement action on July 3, 2017 naming his sister as a defendant. Ms. Jones was one of the early investors in the Bridge Fund. The SEC claimed that she had directly or indirectly offered to sell or sold securities in the Fund based on four pieces of evidence: 1) Her brother paid Ms. Jones a 10% commission on securities purchased by eight investors she had introduced to him; 2) Ms. Jones communicated periodically with five of the eight investors; 3) she spoke with her brother about how to address investor concerns; and 4) three of the investors Ms. Jones contacted purchased over $540,000 of additional securities from her brother. Following discovery the Court rejected these claims, concluding essentially that there was no evidence linking Ms. Jones to the scheme during the limitation period, although she had recommended the investment to friends and received commissions in the early years of the scheme. The Court thus concluded that the SEC failed to establish that Ms. Jones had rendered substantial assistance to the sale of the unregistered, fraudulent shares.

Finally, while the Court agreed that the request for an injunction is one for equitable relief, “in a practical sense there is nothing remaining to be enjoined. Mark Jones is in prison, the Bridge Fund is defunct . . .” An injunction would only admonish Ms. Jones to obey the law. While that type of an injunction may or may not be enforceable, depending on the circumstances, in this case the Court found it would not comport with Rule 65.

SEC Enforcement – Filed and Settled Actions

Statistics: Last week the SEC filed 2 civil injunctive case and 1 administrative proceeding, excluding 12j and tag-along proceedings.

Offering fraud: SEC v. Haddad, Civil Action No. 3:18-cv-00055 (D. Conn. Filed Jan. 11, 2018) is an action which names as defendants David Haddad and two entities he controls, Trafalgar Square Risk Management, LLC and New England Re, LLC. Mr. Haddad held an insurance license and founded both firms. Over a four year period beginning in April 2012 he sold shares in each firm to at least 29 investors, raising about $2.5 million. The funds were supposed to be used to build each company. Instead must of the money went to Mr. Haddad. The complaint alleges violations of Securities Act Section 17(a) and Exchange Act Section 10(b). To resolve the action each Defendant consented to the entry of a permanent injunction based on the Sections cited in the complaint. In addition, Mr. Haddad and Trafalgar agreed to pay, on a joint and several basis, disgorgement in the amount of $619,382.43 and prejudgment interest of $25,131.83; Mr. Haddad and New England agreed to pay, on a joint and several basis, disgorgement of $269,080 and prejudgment interest of $2,592.66. Mr. Haddad will also pay a penalty of $181,071 and has agreed to be barred from serving as an officer or director of a public company. He also agreed to the entry of a conduct injunction. See Lit. Rel. No 24028 (Jan. 11, 2018).

Insider trading: In the Matter of Anthony P. Chiera, Adm. Proc. File No. 3-18335 (Jan. 11, 2018) is a proceeding which names as Respondents Mr. Chiera, a registered representative with a Commission registered broker-dealer and investment adviser, and Jeffrey Belfiore, formerly the Director of Retirement Plans at URS. The case centers on the acquisition of URS by AECOM, an engineering, design and construction company, announced on July 13, 2014. Prior to the deal announcement Mr. Belfiore learned about the then pending transaction through his employment. He told his long time friend, Anthony Chiera, in return for a promise of employment by his friend’s employer. Mr. Chiera purchased over 9,000 shares of URS. Following the announcement of the deal the share price increased by 12%, yielding trading profits of $48,983.67 for Mr. Chiera. In February 2015 Mr. Belfiore received and accepted an offer of employment from Mr. Chiera’s employer. The Order alleges violations of Exchange Act Section 10(b). To resolve the action each Respondent consented to the entry of a cease and desist order based on the Section cited in the Order. In addition, Mr. Chiera will be barred from the securities industry and pay disgorgement in the amount of his trading profits, prejudgment interest of $2,847.17 and a penalty equal to the amount of his trading profits. Mr. Balfiore will pay a penalty of $25,000 and is barred from serving as an officer or director of a public company.

Offering fraud: SEC v. Kaplan, Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-00270 (D. Nev.) is a previously filed action against attorney David Kaplan and three entities he controls, Synchronized Organizational Solutions International, Ltd., Manna International Enterprises Ltd., and Synchronized Organizational Solutions, Ltd. The complaint alleged that Mr. Kaplan raised about $15.8 million from 20 investors who were falsely lead to believe that they were placing their money in a private off-shore trading program that would provide estimated monthly profits of 10%. In fact much of the money was misappropriated. The Defendants settled with the Commission and the Court entered judgments by consent prohibiting future violations of Securities Act Section 17(a) and Exchange Act Section 10(b). In addition the court directed that the Defendants pay disgorgement of $7,139,884.87, prejudgment interest of $680,157.61 and a penalty of $300,000. See Lit. Rel. No. 24027 (Jan. 9, 2018).

Offering fraud: SEC v. Rubbo, Civil Action No. 17-cv-02345 (S.D. Fl. Filed Jan. 8, 2018) is an action which names as defendants Joseph Rubbo and Angela Beckcom Rubbo Monaco. Both defendants are recidivist. Mr. Rubbio has a prior criminal conviction and both defendants have been enjoined by the SEC. This action is part of the SEC Miami office Recidivist Initiative. The complaint alleges that the defendants raised at least $5.4 million from 11 primarily elderly investors involving Florida entertainment companies. Investors were told that their funds would benefit the entertainment companies and their Spongebuddy product. Some investors were told that the Starz cable channel was interested in the properties as was the Pandora Radio. In fact much of the money was misappropriated by the Defendants. During the period of the solicitation neither of the Defendants were registered with the Commission. Steven Dykes, retained to cold call investors, was also not registered. The complaint alleges violations of Securities Act Section 17(a) and Exchange Act Sections 10(b) and 15(a). The case is pending. See Lit. Rel. No. 24026 (Jan. 8, 2018).

Australia

Crowd-sourcing: The Australian Securities and Investment Commission announced the licensing of the first crowd-sourced funding intermediaries under the new CSF regime. Seven companies have been issued Australian Financial Services license authorizations to act as intermediaries able to provide a crowd-sourced funds service. The service is designed to provide start-ups and small and medium sized businesses with a new means to access capital.

Hong Kong

Failure to keep records: The Securities and Futures Commission found that from August 2014 through January 2015 account executive Wu Hon Cheung of Hung Kai Investment Services Limited, failed to keep proper records. Specifically, he failed to use the telephone tape-recorded phone and did not record order details at the time for some of the client orders in a manual trade blotter as the firm required. The regulator imposed a fine of $50,000 and reprimanded Mr. Cheung.

U.K.

Manipulation: The Financial Conduct Authority imposed a financial penalty of £250,000 on former Royal Bank of Scotland interest rate derivatives trader Neil Dannger. He is also prohibited from performing any function in relation to any regulated financial activity. The sanctions were imposed for his manipulative trading. Specifically, from mid-February 2007 through late November 2010 he routinely made requests to RBS’s primary submitters, intending to benefit the trading positions for which he and other derivative traders were responsible; took those trading positions into account when acting as a substitute submitter; and in some instances obtained a broker’s assistance to attempt to manipulate the JPY LIBOR submissions of other banks. Also From mid-September 2008 through late August 2009 he entered 28 wash trades.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Dorsey & Whitney LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Dorsey & Whitney LLP
Contact
more
less

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.