COURT FINDS ERIC ARONSON LIABLE FOR OPERATING A PONZI SCHEME

FROM:  SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

District Court Finds Eric Aronson Liable for Operating a Ponzi Scheme, Issues Permanent Injunctions Against Remaining Individual Defendants and Grants Other Relief

The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that U.S. District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff has ruled that Defendant Eric Aronson violated the antifraud and other provisions of the federal securities laws. In addition, the Court entered orders of permanent injunctions against Defendants Vincent Buonauro and Fredric Aaron and further imposed officer and director and penny stock bars against Aaron. Furthermore, the Court ordered Aronson's wife, Relief Defendant Caroline Aronson, to disgorge the ill-gotten gains she received from her husband.

The Commission's Complaint, filed in October 2011, alleged that, from 2006 to 2010, PermaPave Industries and its affiliates raised more than $26 million from the sale of promissory notes and "use of funds" agreements to over 140 investors. Eric Aronson, Vincent Buonauro and others told investors that there was a tremendous demand for the product - permeable paving stones - and that investors would be repaid from the profits generated by guaranteed product sales. In reality, there was little demand for the product, and defendants used investors' money to make "interest" and "profit" payments to earlier investors and to fund management's lavish lifestyles. In addition, shortly after an affiliate of PermaPave Industries acquired a majority stake in Interlink-US-Network, Ltd., Eric Aronson, Fredric Aaron - who was the attorney for Eric Aronson and the entity defendants - and others issued a press release stating that a company that had never heard of Interlink intended to invest $6 million in Interlink.

On August 6, 2013, the Court granted in part the Commission's motion for summary judgment. Finding that the Commission proved an "almost endless fraud" with evidence that Eric Aronson and others raised millions from investors, misappropriated the funds raised, and then converted the investments several times over to delay and ultimately avoid repayment, the Court ruled that Eric Aronson, age 45 and resident of Syosset, New York, violated Sections 5 and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Subsequently, on December 11, 2013, the Court granted the Commission's motion for reconsideration of the Court's summary judgment order and ruled that Eric Aronson also violated Section 20(e) of the Exchange Act by aiding and abetting Interlink's violations of Exchange Act Sections 10(b) and 13(a) and Rules 10b-5, 12b-20 and 13a-11. Relief for these violations will be determined at a later date.

The Court also granted summary judgment on the Commission's claim for disgorgement against Caroline Aronson, age 43 and resident of Syosset, New York. On December 23, 2013, the Court issued a final judgment ordering Caroline Aronson to pay the full disgorgement amount sought, $296,262.

Also on December 23, 2013, the Court issued judgments as to Vincent Buonauro, age 42 and resident of West Islip, New York, and Fredric Aaron, age 49 and resident of Plainview, New York. Vincent Buonauro agreed to consent to the judgment as to him, which enjoins him from violating Securities Act Sections 5 and 17(a) and Exchange Act Sections 10(b) and 15(a) and Rule 10b-5. Fredric Aaron also agreed to consent to the judgment as to him, which enjoins him from violating Exchange Act Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 and from aiding and abetting violations of Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 12b-20 and 13a-11. The judgment as to Fredric Aaron also imposes five year officer and director and penny stock bars. The Commission's claims for monetary relief against Vincent Buonauro and Fredric Aaron will be determined at a later date.

The Commission's civil action also continues against Relief Defendant Deborah Buonauro. The Court previously issued final judgments against all entity defendants and entity relief defendants on January 19, 2012 and against Defendant Robert Kondratick on October 17, 2012.

SEC ANNOUNCES DEFAULT JUDGEMENT AGAINST PETER MADOFF

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

The Commission announced that, on October 11, 2013, the Honorable Laura Taylor Swain, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, entered a default judgment against Peter Madoff, former chief compliance officer and senior managing director at Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC (BMIS) from 1969 to 2008.

The Commission’s complaint alleged that Peter Madoff created stacks of compliance documents setting out supposedly robust policies and procedures over BMIS’s investment advisory operations. However, no policies and procedures were ever implemented, and none of the reviews were actually performed even though Peter Madoff represented that he personally completed the reviews.

The SEC’s complaint also alleged that in addition to creating false compliance materials, Peter Madoff created false broker-dealer and investment advisor registration applications filed by BMIS. He also failed to implement and review required policies and procedures, and falsified the firm’s books and records. Peter Madoff was richly rewarded for his misconduct, pocketing tens of millions of dollars through salary and bonuses, fake trades, sham loans, and direct, undocumented transfers of investor funds to himself from the bank account that BMIS used to perpetrate the Ponzi scheme.

Peter Madoff failed to answer, move or otherwise respond to the Commission’s complaint. The default judgment permanently enjoins Peter Madoff from violating or aiding and abetting violations of Sections 10(b), 15(b)(1), 15(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-3, 10b-5, 15b3-1 and 17a-3 thereunder, and Sections 204, 206(1), 206(2), 206(4) and 207 of the Advisers Act of 1940 and Rules 204-2 and 206(4)-7 thereunder. The default judgment orders no monetary relief in light of Peter Madoff’s criminal conviction and the $143 billion in restitution ordered in the parallel criminal proceeding United States v. Peter Madoff, 10 Crim. 228 (S.D.N.Y.) (LTS).

WISCONSIN RESIDENT CHARGED BY SEC WITH OPERATING A PONZI SCHEME

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

SEC Charges Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin Resident with Operating a Ponzi Scheme

On October 10, 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Michael R. Enea of Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin with violations of the federal securities laws for conducting fraudulent, unregistered offerings of securities and misappropriating investor funds to pay his personal expenses.

The Commission's complaint alleged that, from July 2006 through May 2013, Enea operated a Ponzi scheme through the fraudulent and unregistered offer and sale of securities to 18 investors totaling approximately $2.1 million. Enea represented to the investors that he would combine his funds with funds contributed by each investor and use the money to invest in a "credit card portfolio." Credit card portfolios, according to Enea, consisted of a group of retail merchants who pay fees to a third party credit card processor each time one of the merchants' customers makes a credit card transaction. Enea told investors that by investing in credit card portfolios the investor would receive monthly or quarterly payments. The payments to investors were purportedly generated by the payment of the transaction fees by the merchants to the credit card processors. In reality, Enea never purchased any credit card portfolios and instead used approximately $1.35 million of the investors' funds to make the monthly or quarterly payments to prior investors. Enea used the remaining approximately $760,000 he raised from investors to pay his personal and business expenses. Enea never told investors that he used their funds to make payments to previous investors or to pay his personal and business expenses. The complaint also alleged that Enea acted as an unregistered broker.

As a result of his conduct, the Commission's complaint charged Enea with violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.

Enea has agreed to settle the charges against him. Specifically, Enea consented to the entry of a final judgment that, without admitting or denying the Commission's allegations against him, permanently enjoins him from future violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder and requires him to pay disgorgement of $763,803, the amount of his ill-gotten gains, plus prejudgment interest of $79,317.

SEC CHARGES FLORIDA RESIDENT FOR ROLE IN FRAUD SCHEME TARGETING COLOMBIAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 
SEC Charges South Florida Resident in Ponzi Scheme Targeting Colombian-American Community

The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a South Florida resident with conducting a Ponzi scheme and affinity fraud that targeted the Colombian-American community, among others. The SEC alleges that Jenny E. Coplan raised approximately $4 million from more than 90 investors, many of whom were Colombian-Americans and Colombians, primarily living in Florida but also in California, Georgia, Texas, Canada, and Colombia. The SEC alleges that Coplan actively solicited investors through personal discussions with individuals both over the phone and in person. According to the SEC's complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Coplan falsely told investors that her company Immigration General Services, LLC operated through an investment broker that would invest funds in immigration bail bonds. Further, Coplan promised investors interest payments ranging from 60 to 108 percent annually and falsely told prospective investors this was a safe investment and their money was FDIC insured. According to the complaint, Coplan never placed investors' funds with an investment broker to make a profit. Instead, the SEC alleges that Coplan, to conceal her unlawful conduct, paid purported profits to earlier investors using funds from newer investors in classic Ponzi scheme fashion and misappropriated approximately $878,000 of investors' funds for her own personal use.

In a parallel action, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida today announced criminal charges against Coplan.

According to the SEC's complaint, Coplan conducted the scheme from at least January 2009 to October 2011. Coplan, who resides in Tamarac, Florida, and her company Immigration Services have never been registered with the SEC to offer securities.

The SEC further alleges that Coplan created fictitious investor statements that were sent to investors to hide Coplan's misuse of investor money and lead investors to believe their investments were growing. The SEC's complaint charges Coplan with violating 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 SEC's complaint also charges Coplan with violations of Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act. The SEC's complaint seeks disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, financial penalties, and injunctive relief against Coplan to enjoin her from future violations of the federal securities laws.

The SEC's investigation was conducted in the Miami Regional Office by Senior Counsel Jorge L. Riera and Accountant Karaz S. Zaki under the supervision of Assistant Regional Director Elisha L. Frank. Amie Riggle Berlin will lead the SEC's litigation. The SEC acknowledges the assistance and cooperation of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

SEC SETTLES WITH HEDGE FUND MANAGER IN PONZI SCHEME

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 
SEC Settles Action Against Oregon-Based Hedge Fund Manager Yusaf Jawed, Who Masterminded a Ponzi Scheme

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission announced that on Sept. 11, 2013, final judgments were entered against Yusaf Jawed and his two entities (Grifphon Asset Management, LLC and Grifphon Holdings, LLC), which enjoin them from future violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, and Sections 206(1), 206(2), and 206(4) of the Investment Advisers Act and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder and order them to pay disgorgement and interest of $33,909,974. The Commission's previously filed complaint alleged that Jawed through the two entities he controlled masterminded a long-running, $30-plus million Ponzi scheme that defrauded more than 100 investors in the Pacific Northwest and across the country.

Based on the final judgment against Jawed, the Commission issued today an Order Instituting Administrative Proceedings Pursuant to Section 203(f) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions that bars Jawed from association with any investment adviser, broker, dealer, municipal securities dealer, municipal advisor, transfer agent, or nationally recognized statistical rating organization.

SEC CHARGES MAN AND COMPANY WITH TARGETING RETIREMENT SAVINGS INVOLVING PONZI SCHEME

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 
The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a Noblesville, Ind., resident and his company with defrauding investors in a Ponzi scheme that targeted retirement savings. 

The SEC alleges that John K. Marcum touted himself as a successful trader and asset manager to raise more than $6 million through promissory notes issued by his company Guaranty Reserves Trust.  Marcum helped investors set up self-directed IRA accounts and gained control over their retirement assets, saying he would earn them strong returns on the promissory notes by day-trading in stocks while guaranteeing the safety of their principal investment.  Yet Marcum did little actual trading and almost always lost money when he did.  Throughout his scheme, Marcum provided investors with false account statements showing annual returns of more than 20 percent.  Meanwhile, he used investor funds to pay for his luxurious personal lifestyle and finance several start-up companies.

The SEC obtained an emergency court order to freeze the assets of Marcum and his company.

“Marcum tricked investors into putting their retirement nest eggs in his hands by portraying himself as a talented trader who could earn high returns while eliminating the risk of loss,” said Timothy L. Warren, Acting Director of the Chicago Regional Office.  “Marcum tried to carry on his charade of success even after he squandered nearly all of the funds from investors.”

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Indianapolis, Marcum began his scheme in 2010.  Investors gave Marcum control of their assets by either rolling their existing IRA accounts into the newly-established self-directed IRA accounts or by transferring their taxable assets directly to brokerage accounts that Marcum controlled.  Marcum and certain investors co-signed the promissory notes, and Marcum then placed them in the IRA accounts.

The SEC alleges that Marcum assured investors he could safely grow their money through investments in widely-held publicly-traded stocks, and he promised annual returns between 10 percent and 20 percent.  Marcum also told a number of investors that their principal was “guaranteed” and would never be at risk.  He falsely told at least one investor that her principal would be federally insured.  In the little trading he has done, Marcum has suffered losses amounting to more than $900,000.  He has misappropriated the remaining investor funds for various unauthorized uses.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Marcum used investor money as collateral for a $3 million line of credit at the brokerage firm where he used to work.  He took frequent and regular advances from the line of credit to fund such start-up ventures as a bridal store, a bounty hunter reality television show, and a soul food restaurant owned and operated by the bounty hunters.  None of these businesses appear to be profitable, and Marcum’s investors were not aware that their money was being used for these purposes.  Marcum used nearly $1.4 million of investor money to make payments directly to the start-up ventures and other companies.  He also used more than a half-million dollars to pay personal expenses accrued on credit card bills, including airline tickets, luxury car payments, hotel stays, sports and event tickets, and tabs at a Hollywood nightclub.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Marcum did not have the funds needed to honor investor redemption requests.  So he provided certain investors with a “recovery plan” that revealed his intention to solicit funds from new investors so that he could pay back his existing investors.  Marcum had a phone conversation with three investors in June 2013 and admitted that he had misappropriated investor funds and was unable to pay investors back.  During this call, Marcum begged the investors for more time to recover their money.  He offered to name them as beneficiaries on his life insurance policies, which he claimed include a “suicide clause” imposing a two-year waiting period for benefits.  He suggested that if he is unsuccessful in returning their money, he would commit suicide to guarantee that they would eventually be repaid.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that Marcum and Guaranty Reserves Trust violated the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws.  The SEC sought and obtained emergency relief including a temporary restraining order and asset freeze.  The SEC additionally seeks permanent injunctions, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains and financial penalties from Marcum and Guaranty Reserves Trust, and disgorgement of ill-gotten gains from Marcum Companies LLC, which is named as a relief defendant.

The SEC’s investigation was conducted by John J. Sikora, Jr., Brian D. Fagel, and Ann M. Tushaus in the Chicago Regional Office.  The SEC’s litigation will be led by Robert Moye.

MAN WHO ORCHESTRATED $72 MILLION PONZI SCHEME RECEIVES 15 YEAR PRISON TERM

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

15 Year Prison Term for Gregory Mcknight, Orchestrator of $72 Million Ponzi Scheme

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that on August 6, 2013, the Honorable Mark A. Goldsmith of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan sentenced Gregory N. McKnight to 188 months (15 years and 8 months) in prison, followed by supervised release of 3 years, and ordered McKnight to pay $48,969,560 in restitution to his victims. McKnight, 53, of Swartz Creek, Michigan, had previously pled guilty to one count of wire fraud for his role in orchestrating a $72 million Ponzi scheme involving at least 3,000 investors. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan filed criminal charges against McKnight on February 14, 2012. McKnight was taken into custody immediately after the sentencing hearing.

The criminal charges arose out of the same facts that were the subject of an emergency action that the Commission filed against McKnight and others on May 5, 2008. On that same day, the Court issued orders freezing McKnight’s assets and those of several companies he controlled, and appointed a Receiver. The Commission’s complaint alleged that, from December 2005 through November 2007, McKnight, through his company Legisi Holdings, conducted a fraudulent, unregistered offering of securities in which he raised approximately $72 million from more than 3,000 investors in all 50 states and several foreign countries. According to the Commission's complaint, McKnight represented that he would invest the offering proceeds in various investment vehicles and pay interest of as much as 15 percent per month from the resulting profits. The complaint charged that McKnight invested less than half of the offering proceeds and that these investments resulted in millions of dollars in losses. The Commission's complaint further charged that McKnight used investor funds to make Ponzi payments to investors and for his own use. The Commission’s complaint charged McKnight with violating Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.

On July 6, 2011, the Court entered a final judgment against McKnight in the Commission’s action, and ordered McKnight to pay disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, prejudgment interest, and civil penalties totaling approximately $6.5 million. The court also issued orders permanently enjoining McKnight from future violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. On July 9, 2013, McKnight's associate Matthew J. Gagnon was sentenced to five years in prison for his role in promoting Legisi.

TWO ACCUSED OF SECURITIES LAWS VIOLATIONS THROUGH A PONZI SCHEME

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Litigation Release No. 22740 / July 2, 2013

SEC Charges Armand R. Franquelin and Martin A. Pool with Violations of the Federal Securities Laws


On, July 2, 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil injunctive action against Armand R. Franquelin (Franquelin) and Martin A. Pool (Pool), alleging that Franquelin and Pool violated the federal securities laws in connection with the sale of securities by The Elva Group, LLC (Elva Group). Judith E. Franquelin, wife of Armand R. Franquelin, was named as a relief defendant.


In its Complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, the Commission alleges that from at least January 2006 through August 2010, Franquelin and Pool engaged in a Ponzi scheme and acted as unregistered broker-dealers by offering and selling more than $12 million in Elva Group securities to approximately 130 investors. The Complaint alleges Franquelin and Pool encouraged investors to convert funds held in Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) into self-directed IRAs through Destiny Funding, LLC, another company owned by Franquelin and Pool, before investing those funds with Elva Group. Franquelin and Pool claimed to use investor funds to develop real estate and guaranteed returns ranging from 10% to 240% per year. Instead of using investor funds as represented, it is alleged that Franquelin and Pool misappropriated investor money for their personal use, to make "interest" payments to earlier investors, and to pay for continuing Elva Group expenses.

The Commission alleges that by engaging in this conduct Franquelin and Pool violated Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (Securities Act) and Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The complaint seeks a permanent injunction as well as disgorgement, prejudgment interest and a civil penalty from Franquelin and Pool. The complaint also seeks disgorgement and prejudgment interest from Judith Franquelin.

Without admitting or denying the allegations in the Commission’s complaint, Pool has consented to the entry of a final judgment permanently enjoining him from future violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act and Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Pool has also consented to pay disgorgement of $970,510.00, plus prejudgment interest of $418,935.05, but payment of disgorgement and prejudgment interest will be waived and no civil penalty will be imposed based on Pool’s current financial condition.




 

OWNERS AND COMPANIES PAY OVER $23 MILLION FOR ROLES IN FOREX PONZI SCHEME

FROM: U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Federal Court Orders Ohioans Kevin and Keelan Harris, Canada-based Karen Starr, and their Companies, Complete Developments, LLC and Investment International Inc., to Pay over $23 Million for Fraud in Foreign Currency Ponzi Scheme

Washington, DC – The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) obtained a federal court Judgment requiring Defendants Kevin Harris, Keelan Harris, Complete Developments, LLC (CDL), and Investment International Inc. (a/k/a/ I3), all of Warren, Ohio, and Karen Starr of Barrie, Ontario, Canada, collectively to pay restitution and civil monetary penalties of over $23 million for solicitation fraud and misappropriation in connection with operating a multi-million dollar off-exchange foreign currency (forex) Ponzi scheme.

Judge David D. Dowd, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio entered the default Judgment and Memorandum Opinion on May 8, 2013, requiring CDL, I3, Kevin Harris, Keelan Harris, and Karen Starr to pay over $15.7 million in restitution to defrauded investors. The Judgment also imposes civil monetary penalties of $2.49 million on Kevin Harris, $2.49 million on Keelan Harris, and $2.64 million on Starr and permanently bans them, CDL, and I3 from trading and registering with the CFTC and from violating anti-fraud provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA), as charged.

The Court’s Memorandum Opinion finds that CDL, I3, Kevin Harris, and Starr violated anti-fraud provisions of the CEA by fraudulently soliciting customers to trade forex and misappropriating customer funds. The Opinion further finds that, from about November 2006 until October 2008, CDL and I3 fraudulently solicited and accepted funds from customers seeking to open "professionally managed" forex trading accounts and that customers invested more than $23 million. Rather than trading forex on their customers’ behalf, the Opinion finds that CDL and I3 operated as a Ponzi scheme and used customers’ money to make payments to other customers and for Kevin Harris, Keelan Harris, and Starr’s own personal use. The Opinion also finds that Kevin Harris, Keelan Harris, and Star controlled CDL and I3 and are liable for CDL and I3’s fraudulent conduct.

Relief Defendants Ordered to Disgorge over $1 Million of Ill-Gotten Gains to Investors

The Judgment orders Relief Defendants Majestic Enterprises Collision Repair, Inc. and UCAN Overseas Corporation S.A. to disgorge $302,277 and $768,000, respectively, consisting of customers funds that they received, but are not entitled to, as a result of the Defendants’ fraudulent conduct. The amounts disgorged are to be applied to the restitution ordered for CDL and I3 customers, according to the Judgment.

CFTC Division of Enforcement staff members responsible for this case are Karin N. Roth, Linda Y. Peng, Michael C. McLaughlin, David W. MacGregor, Lenel Hickson, Jr., Stephen J. Obie, and Vincent A. McGonagle.

SEC SETTLES FRAUD CHARGES AGAINST TWO ALLEGEDLY INVOLVED IN PROMISSORY NOTE PONZI SCHEME

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission settled fraud charges against Eric R. Nelson and Kevin J. Wilcox, and obtained a default judgment against Jennifer E. Thoennes, arising from their alleged participation in a Ponzi scheme operated by Joseph Nelson. The relief obtained concludes the litigation in SEC v. Wilcox.

On December 29, 2011, the Commission charged Eric Nelson, Wilcox, and Thoennes with aiding and abetting Joseph Nelson’s Ponzi scheme, which raised at least $16 million from more than 100 people to invest in promissory notes issued by Joseph Nelson’s companies during 2007 through July 2010. Among other conduct, the Complaint alleged that Eric Nelson, Joseph Nelson’s brother, created fictitious documents that were used to mislead investors about the solvency of Joseph Nelson and his companies, including altering his brother’s bank statements to reflect balances that were far in excess of the amounts actually in his brother’s accounts. The Complaint also alleged that Wilcox and Thoennes made false and misleading statements to investors, including that Joseph Nelson and his companies owned merchant credit card portfolios, that investor funds would be used to purchase additional portfolios, and that as part owners of the merchant credit card portfolios, investors would earn a portion of the monthly residual fees generated by the portfolios.

On April 12, 2013, the Court entered a final judgment against Eric Nelson permanently enjoining him from violating Section 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, and finding him liable for disgorgement of $168,000 and prejudgment interest of $55,103, but waiving such amounts based on his financial condition. On February 19, 2013, the Court entered a final judgment against Wilcox permanently enjoining him from violating Sections 5 and 17(a) of the Securities Act and Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5, and finding him liable for disgorgement of $120,000 and prejudgment interest of $11,433, but waiving all but $23,230 of those amounts based on his financial condition. The Court did not order Nelson or Wilcox to pay a civil penalty based on their respective financial conditions. Eric Nelson and Wilcox agreed to settle the Commission’s charges without admitting or denying the allegations in the Complaint.

On December 20, 2012, the Court entered a final judgment by default against Thoennes. The judgment permanently enjoins Thoennes from violating Sections 5 and 17(a) of the Securities Act and Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5, orders her to pay disgorgement of $45,000 and prejudgment interest of $4,791, and orders her pay a civil penalty of $45,000.

THE SOUTH FLORIDA MAN AND HIS ALLEGED PONZI SCHEME

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
SEC Charges South Florida Man with Recruiting Victims of Ponzi Scheme

he Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a South Florida man with defrauding at least 14 investors by soliciting them to invest in a Ponzi scheme. A significant number of the victims were members of the gay community in Wilton Manors, Florida and included inexperienced, unaccredited investors.

In the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, the SEC alleges that James F. Ellis, 69, a resident of Wilton Manors, Florida, fraudulently solicited investors for George Elia from 2004 to 2011. Elia operated pooled investment vehicles under the names Investor Funding Club and Vision Equities Funds. Elia purported to trade in stocks and earn annual returns as high as 26 percent, but was actually running a Ponzi scheme and paying returns to existing investors from new investor funds. In April 2012, the Commission charged Elia with securities fraud. See Litigation Release No. 22319 (April 6, 2012).

According to the Commission's complaint against Ellis, Ellis persuaded prospective investors by falsely telling them that he had personally invested with Elia at least $5 million that he had inherited from his parents. Ellis variously told investors that he earned 16% to 20% annual returns on his investment with Elia or that he earned $20,000 to $24,000 per month. Elia and his entities did in fact pay Ellis over $2.1 million over seven years. However, those payments were not investment returns because, as Ellis knew, he had not made an investment with Elia that would have returned such large sums of money. According to the complaint, Ellis also reassured prospective investors of the safety of the investment by falsely telling them that he had tested Elia by depositing a large amount of money with Elia, then asking for and receiving it back.

According to the complaint, Ellis bolstered his deceptive claims about the success of his investment with Elia with ostentatious displays of wealth, including expensive real estate, luxury cars, jewelry, opulent entertaining of his friends, and expensive cruises. Though Ellis claimed that his investments with Elia made his luxurious lifestyle possible, he failed to disclose to investors that his wealth derived not from legitimate investment returns but from the money that Elia paid him for fraudulently touting Elia's investment vehicles.

The Commission's complaint charges Ellis with securities fraud in violation of Section 17(a)(1), (2) and (3) 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 alleges that Ellis violated the registration provisions of Sections 5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act. The Commission is seeking permanent injunctions against Ellis for violating the above provisions of the securities laws, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus pre-judgment interest, and civil penalties.

Separately, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida today announced criminal charges against Ellis for his conduct in the scheme.

The Commission thanks the U.S. Attorney's Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation for their assistance in this matter.

CONVICTED PONZI SCHEMER ORDERED TO PAY OVER $18,000,000

FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONThe Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that the United States District Court for the District of Utah entered a final judgment against Jeffrey L. Mowen, ordering Mowen to disgorge $8,041,779 in ill-gotten gains and $1,964,203.67 in prejudgment interest. The Court also ordered Mowen to pay a civil penalty of $8,041,779, for a total of $18,047,761.67. The Court further enjoined Mowen from future violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933.

The SEC Complaint alleged that Mowen operated a Ponzi scheme that was fed through investor funds raised by another defendant, Thomas Fry. Fry, in turn, raised funds through other defendants, Fry’s promoters, via the unregistered offer and sale of high-yield promissory notes. According to the Complaint, the scheme raised over $40 million from over 150 investors in several states, over $18 million of which was funneled to Mowen. Mowen never invested the funds, instead misappropriating over $8 million to support a lavish lifestyle.

On May 4, 2011, Mowen pled guilty to committing wire fraud in a related criminal action and is currently serving a ten year prison sentence. United States of America v. Mowen, Case No. 2:09-cr-00098-DB (D. Utah).

A final judgment ordering disgorgement and penalties against Fry and several of his promoters was entered on June 15, 2012.

PONZI SCHEME PROMOTERS ORDERED TO PAY $20 MILLION IN DISGORGEMENT AND PENALTIES

U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
June 13, 2012
Promoters of Convicted Ponzi Scheme Operator Jeffrey L. Mowen Ordered to Pay Over $20 Million in Disgorgement and Civil Penalties
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that on June 11, 2012, the United States District Court for the District of Utah granted its motion for entry of final judgment against Thomas R. Fry, Bevan J. Wilde, Gary W. Hansen, Michael G. Butcher, James B. Mooring, and Michael W. Averett ordering disgorgement and civil penalties totaling over $20 million. Previously, pursuant to stipulation, the court entered permanent injunctions against these defendants enjoining them from future violations of the federal securities laws. The SEC Complaint alleged that these defendants acted as promoters for a Ponzi scheme operated by Jeffrey L. Mowen, who is currently serving a 10-year prison term for his actions. The Complaint alleged that the promoters raised millions of dollars through the unregistered offer and sale of high-yield promissory notes to over 150 investors in several states. The funds raised were then funneled to Mowen through Thomas Fry, who used the funds for his personal benefit, misappropriating over $8 million.

The Court ordered that the defendants disgorge the following amounts of ill-gotten gains and civil penalties, respectively: Thomas Fry - $16,751,439.94 and $250,000; Bevan Wilde - $1,326,241.77 and $130,000; James Mooring - $505,521.84 and $130,000; Michael Averett - $774,936.02 and $130,000; Gary Hansen - $349,481.33 and $130,000; Michael Butcher - $201,278.11 and $130,000.

The Court also granted, in part, the Commission's motion for summary judgment against defendant and promoter David G. Bartholomew. The Court granted summary judgment against Bartholomew for violations of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933 for the offer and sale of unregistered securities and of Section 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for acting as an unregistered broker-dealer. The Court found issues of material fact concerning materiality and scienter as to misrepresentations Bartholomew made to investors and thus denied summary judgment for violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Those claims should be scheduled for trial later this year.

COURT ENTERS FINAL JUDGEMENT IN DAY TRADING BUSINESS AND PONZI SCHEME

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
May 29, 2012
Securities and Exchange Commission v. New Futures Trading International Corporation and Henry Roche (United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, Civil Action No. 11-CV-532-JL, Complaint Filed November 16, 2011)
Court Enters Final Judgments Against New Hampshire Futures Day-Trading Business and Canadian Resident In Ponzi Scheme Case

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that, on May 24, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire entered final judgments by default against New Futures Trading International Corporation (“New Futures”), a New Hampshire business and Henry Roche, a Canadian resident who directed New Futures, in a Ponzi scheme action the Commission filed in November 2011.  Among other things, the court ordered the parties to pay a total of over $2.8 million.

In its complaint, filed on November 16, 2011, the Commission alleged that Roche, through New Futures, had been engaged in an ongoing unregistered offering of securities in the United States through operations in New Hampshire and Ontario, Canada. The Commission alleged that, since December 2010, Roche had raised over $1.3 million from at least 14 investors in nine states through the offer and sale of high yield promissory notes purportedly yielding either 5-10% per month, or a 200% return within 14 months.

According to the Commission’s complaint, Roche represented to some investors that funds supplied would be invested in bonds, Treasury notes and/or 10-year Treasury note futures contracts, and to others that the funds would be invested directly in New Futures, purportedly an on-line futures day-trading training business Roche was operating from Canada. The complaint alleged that, instead of using the funds for either purpose, Roche used approximately $937,000 provided by New Futures investors to make Ponzi “interest” payments to investors in prior Roche-controlled entities.  According to the Commission’s complaint, Roche also misappropriated at least another $359,000 to support his lifestyle, to operate a horse breeding venture, and to buy horses.  At the time the action was originally filed by the Commission, the court issued a temporary restraining order (later converted to a preliminary injunction) that, among other things, froze the assets of New Futures and Roche and prohibited them from continuing to solicit or accept investor funds.

The court, acting on the Commission’s motion for default judgments, entered final judgments: (1) imposing permanent injunctions against both New Futures and Roche enjoining them from future 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; (2) ordering them each to pay disgorgement of their ill-gotten gains in the amount of $1,242,972 plus prejudgment interest of $40,917.47; and (3) ordering Roche to pay a monetary penalty in the amount of $150,000 and New Futures to pay a monetary penalty in the amount of $150,000.

MAN SENTENCED IN SOUTH FLORIDA $135 MILLION INVESTOR FRAUD CASE

FROM:  SEC
Royal West Properties, Inc. Founding Principal Sentenced In $135 Million Investor Fraud
On April 4, 2012, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams of the Southern District of Florida sentenced Gaston E. Cantens to five years’ imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release for conspiring to commit mail and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §371 involving a $135 million securities offering fraud and Ponzi scheme targeting Cuban-American investors primarily from South Florida. Cantens, who is now 73, served as president of Royal West Properties, Inc. (Royal West), a Miami-based real estate developer that purchased and resold thousands of parcels of real estate on the west coast of Florida. Cantens funded Royal West by offering investors no-risk promissory notes that promised investors annual returns of 9% to 16% purportedly backed by recorded mortgage assignments. On January 25, 2012, Cantens pled guilty to a criminal Information filed by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida. According to the Information, beginning in 2008, Cantens made numerous material misrepresentations to investors about the financial health of Royal West when Cantens knew that Royal West, among other things, paid existing investors with new investors’ funds, assigned the same collateral to multiple investors, assigned investors to non-performing or non-existing mortgages, and failed properly to record mortgages and other interests in the public records, causing investors to have unsecured legal interests in the mortgages and parcels.

On March 3, 2010 the SEC filed an injunctive action that named Cantens and his wife, Teresita Cantens, as defendants.  The SEC’s complaint alleged that Cantens and his wife 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. On March 24, 2011, both Cantens and Teresita Cantens each consented to entry of a Final Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other Relief in the SEC action. In addition to being enjoined from further violations of the federal securities laws, Cantens and his wife were ordered to pay full injunctive relief and disgorgement of $5,276,750, along with prejudgment interest of $88,297.62. The Order forgoes seeking payment of civil penalties under Section 20(d) of the Securities Act and Section 21(d) of the Exchange Act based on the Cantens’s asserted inability to pay as evidenced by their sworn financial statements and supporting documents submitted to the Commission staff.

SERIAL FRAUDSTER BROUGHT TO JUSTICE

The following excerpt is from the SEC website:
March 27, 2012
SEC Obtains Summary Judgment against Serial Fraudster Matthew J. Gagnon
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that on March 22, 2012, the Honorable George Caram Steeh of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan granted the SEC’s motion for summary judgment and entered a final judgment against defendant Matthew J. Gagnon of Portland, Oregon and Weslaco, Texas. The Court found that Gagnon violated the registration, anti-fraud, and anti-touting provisions of the federal securities laws by promoting and operating a series of securities offerings through his website, www.Mazu.com, and ordered Gagnon to pay $4.1 million in disgorgement with prejudgment interest and a $100,000 civil penalty.

The SEC filed this action against Gagnon on May 11, 2010, alleging that since 1997, Gagnon had billed himself as an Internet business opportunity expert and his website as “the world’s first and largest opportunity review website.” According to the SEC’s complaint, from January 2006 through approximately August 2007, Gagnon helped orchestrate a massive Ponzi scheme conducted by Gregory N. McKnight and his company, Legisi Holdings, LLC, which raised a total of approximately $72.6 million from over 3,000 investors by promising returns of upwards of 15% a month. The complaint also alleged that Gagnon promoted Legisi but in doing so misled investors by claiming, among other things, that he had thoroughly researched McKnight and Legisi and had determined Legisi to be a legitimate and safe investment. The complaint alleged that Gagnon had no basis for the claims he made about McKnight and Legisi. Gagnon also failed to disclose to investors that he was to receive 50% of Legisi's purported "profits" under his agreement with McKnight. According to the complaint, Gagnon received a net of approximately $3.8 million in Legisi investor funds from McKnight for his participation in the scheme.

The SEC's complaint further alleged that beginning in August 2007, Gagnon fraudulently offered and sold securities representing interests in a new company that purportedly was to develop resort properties. The complaint alleged that Gagnon, among other things, falsely claimed that the investment was risk-free and "SEC compliant," and guaranteed a 200% return in 14 months. In reality, however, Gagnon sent the money to a twice-convicted felon, did not register the investment with the SEC, and knew such an outlandish return was impossible. Gagnon took in at least $361,865 from 21 investors.
The SEC's complaint also alleged that in April 2009, Gagnon began promoting a fraudulent offering of interests in a purported Forex trading venture. Gagnon guaranteed that the venture would generate returns of 2% a month or 30% a year for his investors. Gagnon's claims were false, and he had had no basis for making them because Gagnon never reviewed his friend’s trading records before promoting the offering, which would have shown over $150,000 in losses over the previous nine months.

The SEC's complaint charged Gagnon with violating Sections 5(a), 5(c), 17(a) and 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 15(a)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. In addition to the emergency relief already obtained, the complaint sought preliminary and permanent injunctions, disgorgement, and civil penalties from Gagnon. On May 24, 2010, the SEC obtained an emergency order freezing Gagnon’s assets and other preliminary relief. Subsequently, on August 6, 2010, the Court granted an order of preliminary injunction against Gagnon pursuant to his consent.

In granting the Commission’s motion and entering final judgment, the Court found that Gagnon “purposefully built up an image of trustworthiness in the on-line investing community and exploited this trust.” The Court also found that Gagnon “repeatedly committed egregious violations of the federal securities laws” and “has shown no remorse for his conduct.”

The Court’s final judgment against Gagnon permanently enjoins him from future violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), 17(a) and 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 15(a)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and orders Gagnon to pay $3,613,259 in disgorgement, $488,570.47 in prejudgment interest, and a $100,000 civil penalty.

MAN PLEADS GUILTY IN $72 MILLION PONZI SCHEME

The following excerpt is from the SEC website:

February 24, 2012
“SEC v. Gregory N. McKnight, et al.: 08-cv-11887 (E.D. Mich.)
Court Accepts Guilty Plea from Gregory McKnight in $72 Million Ponzi Scheme
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that on February 16, 2012, the Honorable Mark A. Goldsmith of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan accepted a guilty plea by Flint-area resident Gregory N. McKnight to one count of wire fraud for his role in orchestrating a $72 million Ponzi scheme involving at least 3,000 investors. For his crimes, McKnight faces a potential maximum penalty of 20 years in federal prison. His sentence will be determined at a future date. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan filed criminal charges against McKnight on February 14, 2012.

The criminal charges arose out of the same facts that were the subject of an emergency action that the Commission filed against McKnight and others on May 5, 2008. On that same day, the Court issued orders freezing McKnight’s assets and those of several companies he controlled, and appointed a Receiver. The Commission’s complaint alleged that, from December 2005 through November 2007, McKnight, through his company Legisi Holdings, conducted a fraudulent, unregistered offering of securities in which he raised approximately $72 million from more than 3,000 investors in all 50 states and several foreign countries. According to the Commission's complaint, McKnight represented that he would invest the offering proceeds in various investment vehicles and pay interest of as much as 15 percent per month from the resulting profits. The complaint charged that McKnight invested less than half of the offering proceeds and that these investments resulted in millions of dollars in losses. The Commission's complaint further charged that McKnight used investor funds to make Ponzi payments to investors and for his own use. The Commission’s complaint charged McKnight with violating Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.

On July 6, 2011, the Court entered a final judgment against McKnight in the Commission’s action, and ordered McKnight to pay disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, prejudgment interest, and civil penalties totaling approximately $6.5 million. The court also issued orders permanently enjoining McKnight from future violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 hereunder.”

JUDGEMENT ANNOUNCED AGAINST PERMAPAVE ENTITIES

The following excerpt is from the SEC website:

January 23, 2012
“The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that, on January 19, 2012, the Honorable Jed S. Rakoff of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a default judgment that imposes a permanent injunction against future violations of the registration and antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws against PermaPave Industries, LLC, PermaPave USA Corp., PermaPave Distributions, Inc., and Verigreen, LLC (the PermaPave Entities) and that also imposes a permanent injunction against future violations of the reporting and antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws against Interlink-US-Network, Ltd.

As to monetary relief, the judgment orders the PermaPave Entities to pay disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and civil penalties and orders Interlink to pay civil penalties. The judgment also orders relief defendants DASH Development, LLC, Aron Holdings, Inc., PermaPave Construction Corp., Dymoncrete Industries, LLC, Dymon Rock LI, LLC, and Lumi-Coat, Inc. to disgorge the ill-gotten gains they received from defendants.

This judgment resolves the Commission’s claims and grants all relief sought against the PermaPave Entities, Interlink, DASH, Aron Holdings, PermaPave Construction, Dymoncrete Industries, Dymon Rock, and Lumi-Coat in a civil action filed on October 6, 2011.

The Commission’s Complaint alleged that, from 2006 to 2010, the PermaPave Entities raised more than $26 million from the sale of promissory notes and “use of funds” agreements to over 140 investors. Their management told investors that there was a tremendous demand for the product that the PermaPave Entities ostensibly sold – permeable paving stones – and that investors would be repaid by the profits generated by the guaranteed sales of this product. In reality, however, there was little demand for the product, and defendants used investor proceeds to make “interest” and “profit” payments to earlier investors and to fund management’s lavish lifestyles. The management of the PermaPave Entities also caused Interlink to issue a Form 8-K stating that a company that had never heard of Interlink had agreed to invest $6 million in Interlink.

The judgment (i) permanently enjoins the PermaPave Entities from future 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 Exchange Act Rule 10b-5, (ii) permanently enjoins Interlink from future violations of Sections 10(b) and 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, and 13a-11, (iii) orders the PermaPave Entities to pay $7,734,983 in disgorgement, $281,268 in prejudgment interest, and $7.7 million in civil penalties, (iv) orders Interlink to pay $375,000 in civil penalties, and (v) orders relief defendants DASH, Aron Holdings, PermaPave Construction, Dymoncrete Industries, Dymon Rock, and Lumi-Coat to disgorge ill-gotten gains received from defendants totaling $4,236,252 and prejudgment interest totaling $214,233.

The Commission’s civil action continues against Defendants Eric Aronson, Vincent Buonauro, Robert Kondratick, Fredric Aaron, and Permeable Solutions, Inc. and Relief Defendants Caroline Aronson and Deborah Buonauro.”

SEC ALLEGES SIPC HAS FAILED TO START LIQUIDATION PROCEEDINGS WITH STANFORD GROUP

The following excerpt is from the SEC website:

December 15, 2011
“On December 12, 2011, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed an application with the federal district court in the District of Columbia to compel the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC) to file an application to begin a liquidation proceeding with regard to Stanford Group Company (SGC), a broker-dealer registered with the Commission and a SIPC-member brokerage firm.
In February 2009, the Commission brought a civil enforcement action against Robert Allen Stanford, SGC, and others, alleging that they operated a multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme. As a result of that enforcement action, a federal district court in Texas ordered that SGC be placed into receivership.
On June 15, 2011, the Commission directed SIPC to take steps to initiate a liquidation proceeding with regard to SGC because there were customers in need of the protections of the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970 (SIPA). Among other things, SIPA provides for coverage of up to $500,000 to customers of a defunct brokerage firm in the event that funds available at the firm are insufficient to satisfy claims covered by the statute. This coverage is provided from a fund maintained by SIPC.
Despite the Commission's directive, SIPC has failed to take steps to initiate a liquidation proceeding as to SGC.”

SEC ALLEGES CANADIAN RESIDENT USED BUSINESS AS PONZI SCHEME

The following excerpt is from the SEC website: November 17, 2011 “The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that, on November 16, 2011, it charged a New Hampshire business directed by a Canadian resident with obtaining over $1.3 million from investors in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme. The SEC also announced that Judge Joseph N. Laplante of the U.S. District Court in New Hampshire has issued a temporary restraining order that, among other things, freezes the assets of the company and its principal and prohibits them from continuing to solicit or accept investor funds. In its complaint, the SEC alleges that Henry Roche, a Canadian resident, through New Futures Trading International Corporation has been engaged in an ongoing unregistered offering of securities in the United States through operations in New Hampshire and Ontario, Canada. According to the Complaint, since December 2010 Roche has raised over $1.3 million from at least 14 investors in nine states through the offer and sale of high yield promissory notes purportedly yielding either 5-10% per month, or a 200% return within 14 months. The Complaint alleges that Roche represented to some investors that funds supplied would be invested in bonds, Treasury notes and/or 10-year Treasury note futures contracts, and to others that the funds would be invested directly in New Futures, an on-line futures day-trading training business Roche was operating from Canada. According to the complaint, instead of using the funds for either purpose, Roche used approximately $937,000 provided by New Futures investors to make Ponzi “interest” payments to investors in prior Roche-controlled entities. The Complaint also alleges that Roche misappropriated at least another $359,000 to support his lifestyle, to operate a horse breeding venture, Majestic Horses, and to buy horses. The Complaint alleges that Roche’s present activity through New Futures appears to be the continuation of an ongoing investment scheme Roche has been operating over the past three years under a series of entity names, including Masters Palace, Inc., and Third Realm Institute (a/k/a Third Realm, Inc.). The Commission’s complaint charges Roche and New Futures Trading International Corporation with violating Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The Commission acknowledges the assistance of the Ontario Securities Commission and the New Hampshire Bureau of Securities in this matter.”