Financial Enforcement Actions | Week of January 04 to January 10

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Shaun Rowe
Violation: Mr Rowe has failed to comply with the regulatory requirement to submit the Return. Mr Rowe has not been open and co-operative in all his dealings with the Authority, in that Mr Rowe has failed to respond adequately to the Authority’s repeated requests for him to submit the Return, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Authority’s Principles for Businesses and to satisfy the Authority that he is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Shaun Rowe
Violation: Mr Rowe has failed to comply with the regulatory requirement to submit the Return. Mr Rowe has not been open and co-operative in all his dealings with the Authority, in that Mr Rowe has failed to respond adequately to the Authority’s repeated requests for him to submit the Return, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Authority’s Principles for Businesses and to satisfy the Authority that he is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Shaun Rowe
Violation: Mr Rowe has failed to comply with the regulatory requirement to submit the Return. Mr Rowe has not been open and co-operative in all his dealings with the Authority, in that Mr Rowe has failed to respond adequately to the Authority’s repeated requests for him to submit the Return, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Authority’s Principles for Businesses and to satisfy the Authority that he is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards under the regulatory system… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Monster Loans, Lend Tech Loans, and Student Loan Debt Relief Companies
Violation: Defendants violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by wrongfully obtaining consumer report information and that, in connection with the marketing and sale of student loan debt relief products and services, certain Defendants charged unlawful advance fees and engaged in deceptive acts and practices. The complaint also alleges that certain entities and individuals are liable as Relief Defendants because they received profits resulting from the illegal conduct. The Bureau’s complaint seeks an injunction against defendants, as well as damages, redress to consumers, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and the imposition of civil money penalties… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Chou Team Realty, LLC f/k/a Chou Team Realty, Inc., d/b/a Monster Loans, d/b/a MonsterLoans; Lend Tech Loans, Inc.; Docu Prep Center, Inc., d/b/a DocuPrep Center, d/b/a Certified Document Center; Document Preparation Services, LP, d/b/a DocuPrep Center, d/b/a Certified Document Center; Certified Doc Prep, Inc.; Certified Doc Prep Services, LP; Assure Direct Services, Inc.; Assure Direct Services, LP; Direct Document Solutions, Inc.; Direct Document Solutions, LP; Secure Preparation Services, Inc.; Secure Preparation Services, LP; Docs Done Right, Inc.; Docs Done Right, LP; Bilal Abdelfattah, a/k/a Belal Abdelfattah, a/k/a Bill Abdel; Robert Hoose; Eduardo “Ed” Martinez; Jawad Nesheiwat; Frank Anthony Sebreros; and David Sklar,
Violation: Defendants violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by wrongfully obtaining consumer report information and that, in connection with the marketing and sale of student loan debt relief products and services, certain Defendants charged unlawful advance fees and engaged in deceptive acts and practices. The complaint also alleges that certain entities and individuals are liable as Relief Defendants because they received profits resulting from the illegal conduct. The Bureau’s complaint seeks an injunction against defendants, as well as damages, redress to consumers, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and the imposition of civil money penalties… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Grand Bahama Cruise, LLC
Violation: In January 2020, three people and a telephone call center that helped Florida-based Grand Bahama Cruise Line LLC
(GBCL) and others to make millions of illegal robocalls to consumers settled an FTC complaint and are permanently
barred from making telemarketing robocalls… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Mortgage Solutions FCS, Inc.
Violation: Consumers cannot reasonably avoid the injury caused by the Yelp responses because they had no way of knowing Defendants would publicly disclose their private financial information. Consumers cannot access Defendants’ services without providing the kinds of sensitive information that Defendants disclosed. Having once provided such information, consumers have no reasonable ability to control Defendants’ disclosure of it. The injury caused by the Yelp responses is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or competition. Rather, Defendants’ conduct has the potential to erode consumers’ trust in financial institutions and chill consumer speech about the quality of financial services they receive… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Axon Enterprise, Inc.
Violation: The Federal Trade Commission has issued an administrative complaint challenging Axon Enterprise, Inc.’s consummated acquisition of its body-worn camera systems competitor VieVu, LLC. Before the acquisition, the two companies competed to provide body-worn camera systems to large, metropolitan police departments across the United States. According to the complaint, Axon’s May 2018 acquisition reduced competition in an already concentrated market. Before their merger, Axon and VieVu competed to sell body-worn camera systems that were particularly well suited for large metropolitan police departments. The Commission vote to issue the administrative complaint was 5-0. The administrative trial is scheduled to begin on May 19, 2020… Read More

Penalties: $125,000.00
Respondent: Virtu Americas LLC (f/k/a KCG Americas LLC),
Violation: From May 2013 to September 2019 (the “review period”), the firm did not maintain a reasonable written methodology governing the execution and priority of all pending orders that it received for handling and execution. In particular, the firm did not have a written execution methodology for OTC equity securities that were handled manually and executed outside of the firm’s automated Manning system’ as well as for certain categories of National Market System (“NMS”) securities that were executed manually during the review period. This matter results from a review by FINRA’s Market Regulation Department… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Shlomo Strugano
Violation: Respondent violated FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010 in October 2019 by failing to appear and provide testimony as requested pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210, in connection with an investigation into whether he had forged or falsified customer signatures and initials on account and transaction documents… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: John Chrysadakis,
Violation: Chrysadakis refused to cooperate with FINRA’s November 8, 2019 request fr documents and information sent pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210. As a result, Chrysadakis has violated FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Gabriel W. Hynes
Violation: Hynes refused to appear for on-the-record testimony requested pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210. By virtue of this misconduct, Hynes violated FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: $7,500.00
Respondent: James R Willing
Violation: Between June 15, 2015 and December 31, 2016, Willing invested a total of $62,500 of his own money in a series of private securities transactions without providing prior written notice of or receiving written approval for these transactions from Morgan Stanley in violation of NASD Rule 3040 and FINRA Rules 3280 and 2010… Read More

Penalties: $2,598,665.09
Respondent: Richard D. Carter
Violation: Carter willfully or recklessly made material misrepresentations about Blue Guru. Carter falsely told participants and prospective participants that the funds that they invested would be used to trade commodity futures contracts in a pool account at a registered FCM located in Chicago (“FCM A”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: US Coins Bullion
Violation: Engaged, are engaging, or are about to engage in conduct in violation of Section 6(c)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act (“Act”), 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) (2012), and Commission Regulation (“Regulation”) 180.1(a), 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a) (2019)… Read More

Penalties: $1,798,985
Respondent: Jay Costa Kelter
Violation: To resolve the SEC’s allegations, Kelter consented to the entry of the final judgment, enjoining him from future violations of the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Sections 206(1) and (2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940… Read More

Penalties: $1,822,438.00
Respondent: J.P. Morgan Securities LLC
Violation: JPMS willfully violated Sections 17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, which prohibit any person, in the offer or sale of securities, from obtaining money or property by means of any untrue statement of material fact or any omission to state a material fact necessary in order to make statements made not misleading, and from engaging in any transaction, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon the purchaser, respectively… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Stephen Condon Peters
Violation: Respondent was convicted of twenty counts, including one count of Investment Advisor Fraud and Aiding and Abetting; one count of Fraud in the Sale of Unregistered Securities; nine counts of Wire Fraud and Aiding and Abetting; four counts of Money Laundering and Aiding and Abetting; one count of Conspiracy to Make and Use False Documents And to Falsify and Conceal Records; one count of Making and Using False Documents and Aiding and Abetting; one count of Falsifying and ConcealingRecords and Aiding and Abetting; one count of Corrupt Endeavor to Influence a Federal Agency; and one count of Aggravated Identity Theft and Aiding and Abetting… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Steven A. Schwartz
Violation: According to the SEC’s complaint, Steven A. Schwartz, Ruderman’s brother-in-law, served as 1 Global’s director and, according to 1 Global’s marketing materials, as its chief operating officer. The complaint further alleges that Schwartz became trustee of a Ruderman family trust in June 2014, and that shortly afterwards, Ruderman had Schwartz execute an agreement conveying ownership of 1 Global to the trust… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Dennis Gibb and Sweetwater Investments, Inc.
Violation: From July 2007 to September 2018, Gibb stole more than $3 million from Sweetwater Income Flood LP (“Income Flood”), a private fund managed by Sweetwater. The Commission found that, among other misrepresentations, Gibb inflated account values and Income Flood holdings in account statements and tax documents sent to investors, and in Forms ADV filed with the Commission. The Commission determined that, by this conduct, Gibb and Sweetwater (collectively, the “Respondents”) willfully violated, among other things, the antifraud provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Aladdin Capital Management LLC and Aladdin Capital LLC; Joseph A. Schlim
Violation: On December 17, 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) issued an Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 203(k) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, Making Findings, and Imposing a Cease-and-Desist Order against Aladdin Capital Management LLC (“ACM”) and Aladdin Capital LLC (“Aladdin Capital”) (the “Aladdin Order”), 1 finding that Aladdin Capital violated Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and ACM violated Section 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 by making misrepresentations to investors that ACM would co-invest with its clients in two collateralized debt obligations… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. – Petrobras
Violation: Petrobras engaged in a large-scale expansion of its infrastructure for producing oil and gas, a matter of significant interest to investors. During the same period, certain former senior Petrobras executives (the “Corrupt Executives”) worked with Petrobras’s largest contractors and suppliers to inflate the cost of Petrobras’s infrastructure projects by billions of dollars. In return, the companies executing those projects paid billions of dollars in kickbacks that typically amounted to between 1% to 3% of the contract cost to the Corrupt Executives and conspiring politicians and political parties, including the Brazilian politicians to whom the Corrupt Executives owed their jobs at Petrobras. These same executives submitted misleading documents as part of Petrobras’ internal process of preparing its filings with the Commission… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Edward Espinal, and Cash Flow Partners, LLC
Violation: The SEC charged Meenavalli with violations of the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder and Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933. Meenavalli was also charged with violating the internal controls and books-and-records provisions of Section 13(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, falsifying accounting records in violation of Exchange Act Rule 13b2-1, lying to accountants in violation of Exchange Act Rule 13b2-2, and violating the certification provision of Exchange Act Rule 13a-14, and with aiding and abetting Longfin’s violations of the reporting, books-and-records, and internal controls provisions of Sections 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A), and 13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rules 12b-20, 13a-1, 13a-11, and 13a-13… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Luke Christopher Zouvas, Esq.
Violation: Accordingly, it is ORDERED, that Luke Christopher Zouvas is forthwith suspended from appearing or practicing before the Commission pursuant to Rule 102(e)(2) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Bradley C. Mascho
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Section 203(f) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) against Bradley C. Mascho (“Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: ARO Equity, LCC et al
Violation: The SEC’s complaint alleges that ARO Equity, Renison, and Allcott violated the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. The complaint further alleges that Renison violated Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act. The Commission’s complaint seeks a permanent injunction, conduct-based injunctions against Renison and Allcott, disgorgement plus prejudgment interest, civil penalties, and an order from the Court requiring Renison to comply with the SEC’s 2014 bar… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Donald G. Blakstad
Violation: The SEC’s complaint alleges that, between July 2015 and May 2019, Blakstad induced investors to purchase the securities of companies he controlled, including both Energy Sources International Corporation and Xact Holdings Corporation, by making materially false and misleading statements and omissions about the use of investor proceeds and business operations. According to the SEC’s complaint, instead of using investor funds as promised, Blakstad misappropriated at least $2.2 million of investor funds. Blakstad allegedly spent the investor funds on personal entertainment, the purchase of a stake in a night club, and a luxury automobile. In July 2019, the Commission charged Blakstad for his role in a separate insider trading scheme… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Franklin Scientific, Inc. and Goodwell Inc.,
Violation: Respondents are delinquent in their periodic filings with the Commission, have repeatedly failed to meet their obligations to file timely periodic reports, and failed to heed delinquency letters sent to them by the Division of Corporation Finance requesting compliance with their periodic filing obligations or, through their failure to maintain a valid address on file with the Commission as required by Commission rules, did not receive such letters. As a result of the foregoing, Respondents failed to comply with Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Danka Business Systems PLC
Violation: Respondents are delinquent in their periodic filings with the Commission, have repeatedly failed to meet their obligations to file timely periodic reports, and failed to heed delinquency letters sent to them by the Division of Corporation Finance requesting compliance with their periodic filing obligations or, through their failure to maintain a valid address on file with the Commission as required by Commission rules, did not receive such letters. Respondents failed to comply with Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Credit Suisse Securities USA LLC, Sanford Michael Katz
Violation: On April 4, 2017, the Commission instituted and simultaneously settled administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings against Credit Suisse Securities (USA), LLC (“Credit Suisse”), a dually registered broker-dealer and investment adviser, for breaches of its fiduciary duty, inadequate disclosures, and deficiencies in compliance policies and procedures.1 Contemporaneously therewith, in a related action, the Commission instituted and settled administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings against Sanford Michael Katz (“Katz”), a registered representative and investment adviser of Credit Suisse… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Michael Mindlin
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), Section 203(f) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”), and Section 9(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”) against Michael Mindlin (“Mindlin” or “Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Rick D. Mullins
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Rule 102(e) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice against Rick D. Mullins (“Respondent”)… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Debt Resolve, Inc. and Elite Group, Inc.,
Violation: Respondents are delinquent in their periodic filings with the Commission, have repeatedly failed to meet their obligations to file timely periodic reports, and failed to heed delinquency letters sent to them by the Division of Corporation Finance requesting compliance with their periodic filing obligations or, through their failure to maintain a valid address on file with the Commission as required by Commission rules, did not receive such letters. Respondents failed to comply with Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder… Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: CannaSys, Inc., China Modern Agricultural Information, Inc., and Cinderella Target Value Zones Inc. f/k/a China Travel Resort Holdings, Inc.,
Violation: Respondents are delinquent in their periodic filings with the Commission, have repeatedly failed to meet their obligations to file timely periodic reports, and failed to heed delinquency letters sent to them by the Division of Corporation Finance requesting compliance with their periodic filing obligations or, through their failure to maintain a valid address on file with the Commission as required by Commission rules, did not receive such letters. Respondents failed to comply with Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder… Read More

Click here to see the full list of SEC Enforcement Documents