SEC ANNOUNCES $6.5 MILLION JUDGEMENT IN CASE INVOLVING STOCK MANIPULATION THROUGH FALSE PRESS RELEASES

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

Litigation Release No. 23349 / September 16, 2015

Securities and Exchange Commission v. 8000, Inc., Jonathan E. Bryant, Thomas J. Kelly, and Carl N. Duncan, Esq., Civil Action No. 12-civ-7261 (S.D.N.Y., Complaint filed Sept. 27, 2012)

Court Orders Company to Pay More Than $6.5 Million in U.S. Stock Manipulation Scheme

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that on September 14, 2015, a federal court in New York entered a final judgment by default against 8000, Inc., a Virginia-based company, that ordered it to pay $6,525,000 in a civil penalty in a stock manipulation case filed by the Commission in 2012. The Commission alleged that the Company issued numerous false press releases to inflate the value of the company so that certain parties could benefit.

In addition to 8000, Inc., the Commission's complaint, filed on September 27, 2012, also charged Jonathan Bryant, a consultant for the company as well as the company's former Chief Executive Officer, Thomas Kelly of Levittown, Pennsylvania, and the company's attorney, Carl N. Duncan of Bethesda, Maryland. The complaint alleged that the defendants participated in a scheme to manipulate the trading volume and price of 8000 Inc.'s common stock by disseminating false information about the company and simultaneously selling or facilitating the sale of its securities which were not supposed to be for sale to the general public. According to the complaint, from November 2009 through October 2010, Bryant and Kelly disseminated financial reports and press releases falsely representing that 8000, Inc. had millions of dollars in capital financing and revenues when, in fact, the company had neither. As 8000, Inc.'s stock price rose based on the false information they were disseminating, Bryant profited by selling 56.8 million "restricted" shares of 8000, Inc. into the market. Because the shares were restricted, they should not have been sold into the market at that time. The complaint alleged that Duncan provided false legal opinions removing the trading restrictions on the stock, and that Kelly profited from the scheme by buying and selling the company's securities in the secondary market. The complaint alleged that the defendants' scheme increased the volume of trading in 8000, Inc. by 93% and the company's stock price from less than $0.01 per share to $0.42 per share between November 2009 and October 2010.

In addition to ordering 8000, Inc. to pay $6.5 million, the final judgment entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York permanently enjoins 8000, Inc. from future violations of various antifraud and securities registration sections of the federal securities laws, including Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (Securities Act) and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.

The judgment against 8000, Inc. concludes the Commission's case. Defendants Bryant, Kelly, and Duncan all previously settled the Commission's action. Bryant consented to the entry of a final judgment that was entered on April 7, 2015. The final judgment permanently enjoined Bryant from future violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The final judgment also ordered Bryant to disgorge the $2,969,525 in profits that he realized from selling 8000, Inc.'s restricted securities and to pay $198,659.70 in pre-judgment interest. Additionally, the final judgment barred Bryant from acting as an officer or director of any issuer that has a class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act, and permanently barred him from participating in an offering of a penny stock.

Kelly consented to the entry of a final judgment that was entered on June 6, 2013, which permanently enjoined Kelly from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. It also permanently barred Kelly from acting as an officer or director of any issuer that has a class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act, and permanently barred him from participating in an offering of a penny stock. On September 2, 2014, after a hearing, the court ordered Kelly to pay $415,569 in profits that he realized from trading in 8000 Inc.'s securities in the secondary market and to pay $46,697 in pre-judgment interest.

Duncan agreed to settle the Commission's action at the time it was filed. In December 2012, the court entered a final judgment against Duncan that permanently enjoined Duncan from violating Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act, permanently enjoined him from participating in the preparation and issuance of certain opinion letters, bars him from participating in an offering of a penny stock, and ordered him to disgorge $15,570 in unlawful proceeds and to pay $524.98 in prejudgment interest and a $25,000 civil money penalty. Duncan also consented to an administrative order issued pursuant to Rule 102(e)(3) of the Commission's Rules of Practice permanently suspending him from appearing or practicing before the Commission as an attorney.

The SEC would like to thank the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority for their assistance in this matter.

DAY-TRADER CHARGED FOR ROLE IN MANIPULATION STOCK PRICES TO OBTAIN NASDAQ LISTING

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Litigation Release No. 23224 / March 27, 2015

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Michael J. Ling, Civil Action No. 15-cv-02179

SEC Charges Day-Trader with Manipulating Stock Prices in Order to Obtain NASDAQ Listing for Company

The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced charges against a New Jersey-based day-trader who allegedly manipulated the securities of a microcap company in order to drive-up and maintain the company's stock price above the minimum price required for listing on a national exchange. According to the SEC, apart from helping the company get listed on the exchange, the day-trader also profited from his scheme by more than $650,000.

The SEC alleges that Michael J. Ling repeatedly engaged in marking-the-close trades and entered into matched trades in shares of Cyberdefender Corp., a now-defunct computer software company, in order to maintain the price of the microcap company at or above $4.00 per share over the period September 2009 through June 2010. Maintaining a closing bid price at $4.00 per share or higher for 90 consecutive trading days prior to application was a prerequisite for listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market. Marking-the-close is the practice of attempting to influence the closing price of a stock by executing orders at or near the close of the market. A matched trade occurs when an order for the purchase (or sale) of a security is entered with the knowledge that a substantially similar order for the sale (or purchase) of the security has been or will be entered.

According to the SEC's complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, over a period of 144 trading days, Ling traded in Cyberdefender Corp. stock on 127 days, and on 54 of those 127 days, Ling traded in the final fifteen minutes of the trading day. Further, Ling was the last trade of the day, and thus set the closing price, on 48 days. Ling also engaged in 23 matched trades that were coordinated with an acquaintance.

The Commission alleges that Ling profited from his scheme by more than $650,000, mainly by exercising warrants he received at bargain prices. After the manipulation concluded, Cyberdefender's share price slowly fell, leaving unsuspecting shareholders who purchased at elevated prices with a loss.

The SEC's complaint alleges that Ling violated Sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5(a) and 10b-5(c) thereunder.

The Commission's investigation has been conducted by William Finkel, and Thomas P. Smith, Jr. of the New York Regional Office, with assistance from Joseph Darragh of the Commission's Microcap Fraud Task Force. The litigation will be led by David Stoelting. The case is being supervised by Sanjay Wadhwa.

SEC ANNOUNCES JUDGEMENT AGAINST FORMER CEO FOR INVOLVEMENT IN STOCK MANIPULATION SCHEME

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Litigation Release No. 23110 / October 10, 2014

Securities and Exchange Commission v. 8000, Inc., Jonathan E. Bryant, Thomas J. Kelly, and Carl N. Duncan, Esq., Civil Action No. 12-civ-7261 (S.D.N.Y., Complaint filed Sept. 27, 2012)

Judgment Against Former CEO Orders Payment of Over $450,000 in Case Involving Scheme to Manipulate Company's Stock

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that on October 9, 2014, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a Final Judgment against Thomas J. Kelly of Levittown, Pennsylvania. Kelly was the Chief Executive Officer of 8000, Inc., a now defunct Virginia-based company whose stock was quoted on OTC Pink operated by OTC Markets Group LLC. Kelly and 8000, Inc. were defendants in a civil fraud action filed by the Commission on September 27, 2012. Also charged were an undisclosed principal in 8000, Inc., Jonathan E. Bryant of Nantwich, United Kingdom, and the company's attorney, Carl N. Duncan of Bethesda, Maryland.

The Commission's complaint alleged that the defendants participated in a scheme to manipulate the trading volume and price of 8000 Inc.'s common stock by disseminating false information about the company and simultaneously selling, or facilitating the sale of its securities which were not for sale to the general public. According to the complaint, from November 2009 through October 2010, Kelly and Bryant disseminated financial reports and press releases falsely representing that 8000, Inc. had millions of dollars in capital financing and revenues when, in fact, the company had neither. As 8000, Inc.'s stock price rose based on the false information they were disseminating, Bryant is alleged to have sold 56.8 million "restricted" shares of 8000, Inc. into the market with the assistance of Duncan who provided false legal opinions removing the restrictions, and Kelly to have bought and sold the company's securities in the secondary market. The complaint alleged that the defendants' scheme increased the volume of trading in 8000, Inc. by 93% and the company's stock price from less than $0.01 per share to $0.42 per share between November 2009 and October 2010.

The Final Judgment orders Kelly to disgorge the $415,592 in profits that he realized from trading in 8000, Inc.'s securities and to pay $ 46,697in pre-judgment interest. The Final Judgment follows the Judgment that the court entered against Kelly on June 6, 2013, with Kelly's consent and without him admitting or denying the allegations in the Commission's Complaint. That Judgment permanently enjoins Kelly from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. It also permanently bars Kelly from acting as an officer or director of any issuer that has a class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act, and permanently bars him from participating in an offering of a penny stock.

ALLEGED FAMILY INSIDER TRADING SCHEME IN AON HEWITT ASSOCIATES MERGER

October 11, 2011 MERGER AND AN ALLEGED INSIDE TRADING SCHEME IN HEWITT ASSOCIATES STOCK The following is an excerpt from the SEC website: “The Securities and Exchange Commission today filed a civil injunctive action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois charging M. Jason Hanold, a former managing director at an executive search firm in Chicago, with illegal insider trading in Hewitt Associates stock in advance of the July 12, 2010 public announcement of a merger agreement between Aon and Hewitt Associates. The SEC alleges that on July 7, Hanold bought shares of Hewitt Associates stock after learning of the impending merger from his wife, who was an executive at Aon at the time. He did so despite requests from his wife that he keep this nonpublic information confidential. According to the SEC’s complaint, Hanold’s wife learned on or about July 6, 2010 that Aon and Hewitt Associates had reached a merger agreement and that a public announcement was imminent. Hanold’s wife shared this information with Hanold in a telephone call that evening. Shortly after the call ended, Hanold’s wife sent him two emails in which she requested that he not share this information. Hanold replied, “I won’t, no need. I only wish we bought their stock!!!” The next day, July 7, 2010, Hanold purchased 831 shares of Hewitt Associate’s stock in advance of the July 12, 2010 public announcement of the agreement between Hewitt Associates and Aon. The announcement caused Hewitt Associates’ stock price to increase by more than 32%. Hanold sold all of his shares on July 12, 2010 for a profit of $10,241. Without admitting or denying the allegations in the complaint, except as to jurisdiction, Hanold has consented to entry of a final judgment that permanently enjoins him from violating Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Hanold has also consented to pay $20,766 in disgorgement, prejudgment interest and civil penalties. The settlement is subject to approval by the court. James G. O’Keefe conducted the SEC’s investigation in this matter. The Commission acknowledges the assistance of FINRA in this investigation.”

SEC GOES AFER CEOS FOR MICROCAP STOCK PRICE MANIPULATION

The following is an excerpt from the SEC website:

"The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged three CEOs, their companies, and two penny stock promoters with securities fraud for their roles in various schemes to manipulate the volume and price of microcap stocks and illegally generate stock sales. The schemes featured illicit kickbacks, a bribe to a purported corrupt broker, and the creation of a website to deliver e-mail blasts to potential investors.

The SEC worked closely with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida and the Federal Bureau of Investigation as the separate schemes were uncovered through an FBI undercover operation. The operation was conducted in such a way that no investors suffered harm. The U.S. Attorney's Office today announced criminal charges against the same individuals facing SEC civil charges.

According to the SEC's complaints filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, most of the schemes involved the payment of kickbacks to a purportedly corrupt pension fund manager, in exchange for the fund's purchase of restricted shares of stock in the various microcap companies. Another scheme involved a bribe that was to be paid to a purported corrupt stockbroker who agreed to use his ability to buy stock in his customers' discretionary accounts to purchase a microcap company's stock in the open market. What the insiders and promoters did not know was that the people with whom they arranged these illegal transactions were actually undercover FBI agents or confidential sources participating in an undercover operation. A final scheme involved a stock promoter who created a website to tout a penny stock company through a volley of e-mail blasts and who posted phony testimonials from fake investors. The defendants reside or are based in South Florida, California, Texas, and Nevada.

These charges follow a series of cases filed in October and December 2010, in which the SEC charged more than fourteen penny stock promoters and their companies with similar stock manipulation schemes.

The SEC alleges that the company officers and a promoter in most of the schemes understood they needed to disguise the kickbacks as payments to phony consulting companies, which they knew would perform no actual work. They also knew the purported corrupt fund trustee would be violating his fiduciary duties to his clients by taking part in the kickbacks. In other instances, they knew that their illegal activities were meant to artificially inflate the companies' stock price.

The SEC's complaints allege the defendants violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and/or Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The SEC is seeking permanent injunctions and financial penalties against all the defendants; disgorgement plus prejudgment interest against the defendants who received ill-gotten gains; and penny stock bars against all the individual defendants.

The SEC acknowledges the assistance and cooperation of the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Miami Division in investigating these matters.

SEC Complaint in this matter against Brian Gibson
SEC Complaint in this matter against Douglas Newton and Real American Brands, Inc. n/k/a Real American Capital Corp.
SEC Complaint in this matter against Donald W. Klein and KCM Holdings Corp.
SEC Complaint in this matter against Thomas Schroepfer"