Financial Enforcement Actions | Week of February 22 to February 28

Enforcement Report Feb 22-28 feat

Enforcement Report Feb 22 - 28

FTC

9 Enforcement Documents

$0.00 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Peabody Energy/Arch Coal
Violation: The Federal Trade Commission has filed an administrative complaint challenging a proposed joint venture between Peabody Energy Corporation and Arch Coal. The transaction would combine their coal mining operations in the Southern Powder River Basin, located in northeastern Wyoming. The complaint alleges that the transaction will eliminate competition between Peabody and Arch Coal, the two major competitors in the market for thermal coal in the Southern Powder River Basin, and the two largest coal-mining companies in the United States... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Thomas Jefferson University
Violation: The Federal Trade Commission has issued an administrative complaint and authorized an action to block the proposed merger of Jefferson Health and Albert Einstein Healthcare Network, two leading providers of inpatient general acute care hospital services and inpatient acute rehabilitation services in both Philadelphia County and Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. The proposed merger would eliminate the robust competition between Jefferson and Einstein for inclusion in health insurance companies’ hospital networks to the detriment of patients. The Commission vote to issue the administrative complaint and to authorize staff to seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction was 4-0-1, with Chairman Joseph J. Simons recused. The administrative trial is scheduled to begin on Sept. 1, 2020... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Click4Support
Violation: Click4Support and related defendants pretended to be affiliated with companies like Microsoft
and Apple and tricked people into believing their computers were infected, then charged them hundreds of dollars for
unnecessary computer repairs... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Geniux
Violation: These supplements were deceptively marketed using sham news websites that contained false claims about how effective the products were,
references to non-existent clinical studies, and bogus endorsements... Read More

UK-FCA

15 Enforcement Documents

£0.00 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Nuyou Finance (Samantha Edwards Trading as)
Violation: Ms Edwards has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and she has not been open and co-operative in all her dealings with the Authority, in that Ms Edwards has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for her to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that she is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Andrew Totney Developments Limited
Violation: ATDL has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and it has not been open and cooperative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that ATDL has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Kingfisher Finance (Ryan Fawson trading as)
Violation: Mr Fawson has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and he has not been open and co-operative in all his dealings with the Authority, in that Mr Fawson has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for him to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that he is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system 8... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Lychworth Limited
Violation: Lychworth has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and it has not been open and cooperative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that Lychworth has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Southgate Garage
Violation: Southgate has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and it has not been open and co-operative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that Southgate has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Ballooner Limited
Violation: Ballooner has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and it has not been open and cooperative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that Ballooner has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Adrian Doherty
Violation: Mr Doherty has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and he has not been open and co-operative in all his dealings with the Authority, in that Mr Doherty has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for him to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that he is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Belvedere Finance Limited
Violation: BFL has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and it has not been open and cooperative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that BFL has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: OY Media Limited
Violation: OYML has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and it has not been open and cooperative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that OYML has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Andrew Totney Developments Limited
Violation: ATDL has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and it has not been open and cooperative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that ATDL has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Platinum Heating Services Limited
Violation: PHSL has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and it has not been open and cooperative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that PHSL has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Haigh Energy Services Ltd
Violation: HESL has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and it has not been open and cooperative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that HESL has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: DP Gas Services Ltd
Violation: DPGSL has failed to pay the Overdue Balance and it has not been open and cooperative in all its dealings with the Authority, in that DPGSL has failed to respond to the Authority’s repeated requests for it to pay the Overdue Balance, and has thereby failed to comply with Principle 11 of the Principles and to satisfy the Authority that it is ready, willing and organised to comply with the requirements and standards of the regulatory system... Read More

FINRA

15 Enforcement Documents

$115,000.00 in Fines

Penalties: $75,000.00
Respondent: ACS Execution Services, LLC
Violation: Between March 9, 2016, and February 9, 2018 (the "Review Period"), the Firm violated FINRA Rules 7450(a) and 2010 by reporting 343,503,736 Reportable Order Events ("ROEs") to the Order Audit Trail System ("OATS"), nearly all of which contained inaccurate, incomplete or improperly formatted data with respect to order event timestamps in milliseconds... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Jody Thompson
Violation: During the period August 2015 through April 2017 (the "Relevant Period"), Thompson recommended several non-public offerings without having a reasonable basis to believe those transactions were suitable... Read More

Penalties: $5,000.00
Respondent: Kenton C. Crabb
Violation: Between January 2010 and November 2018 (the "Relevant Period"), Crabb failed to amend or timely amend his Form U4 to disclose 11 federal and state tax liens totaling nearly $1.7 million. By virtue of this conduct, Crabb willfully violated Article V, Section 2(c) of FINRA's By-Laws and FINRA Rules 1122 and 2010... Read More

Penalties: $7,500.00
Respondent: Matthew Duane Sibley
Violation: On April 15, 2016, Sibley violated FINRA Rule 2010 by negligently misrepresenting Halen Capital's ability to deliver corporate bonds that were not owned by Halen Capital and that Halen Capital ultimately failed to deliver to the buyer. By doing so, Sibley violated FINRA Rule 2010... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: James G. Mckinney
Violation: On July 26, 2019, FINRA sent Respondent a letter pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210 requesting that he appear at FINRA’s Denver office on August 29, 2019, to provide sworn testimony. Respondent did not appear for his OTR... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Gustavo Trujillo Franco
Violation: A violation of FINRA Rule 8210 also constitutes a violation of FINRA Rule 2010, which requires all associated persons to observe high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Boris Skorodumov
Violation: After receiving a request for on-the-record testimony issued by FINRA staff under FINRA Rule 8210, Respondent notified FINRA staff that he does not intend to appear for testimony or otherwise cooperate with FINRA's investigation... Read More

Penalties: $5,000.00
Respondent: Paul A. Falcon
Violation: Between November 9, 2017 and June 25, 2019 (the "Relevant Period"), Falcon used an unapproved third-party communication application, WhatsApp Messenger, to conduct securities-related business with three Firm customers... Read More

Penalties: $7,500.00
Respondent: Joseph Morris Thurnherr
Violation: Thurnherr refused to provide documents and information requested pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210. As a result, Thumhcrr violated FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010... Read More

Penalties: $10,000.00
Respondent: Terrence E. Bonk
Violation: In September 2018, Bonk borrowed $8,000 from a Firm customer without notifying, or obtaining prior written approval from, the Firm, in violation of FINRA Rules 3240 and 2010. Bonk also made false statements to the Firm in August 2019, which concealed this loan, in violation of FINRA Rule 2010... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: John Clifford Park
Violation: Park failed and refused to provide documents and information requested pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210. By virtue of this misconduct, Park violated FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010... Read More

Penalties: $5,000.00
Respondent: Pedro Perez-Riu
Violation: Between December 1, 2012 and June 30, 2014, Perez, while Head Trader on Santander's Credit Trading Desk, caused two traders under his supervision to execute 154 non-bona fide fixed income transactions. Perez personally executed 9 non-bona fide transactions. By virtue of this conduct, Perez violated FINRA Rules 5210 and 2010... Read More

SEC

27 Enforcement Documents

$53,103,903.00 in Fines

Penalties: $3,929,600.00
Respondent: Nicholas Lattanzio et al
Violation: Lattanzio falsely represented that the BD Fund had as much as $800 million under management and a proven track record of producing double-digit returns. In reality, the fund never had more than approximately $5 million in assets and Lattanzio simply stole funds to finance lavish personal expenses for himself and his family, including a luxury automobile, expensive jewelry, a home in an affluent neighborhood, and private school tuition. Lattanzio, the BD Fund, and three other Lattanzio-controlled entities each consented to the entry of a final judgment, enjoining them from future violations of the antifraud provisions of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, and, with respect to Lattanzio and certain of the entities, Sections 206(1), 206(2) and 206(4) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940... Read More

Penalties: $408,693.42
Respondent: Sica Wealth Management, LLC and Jeffrey C. Sica
Violation: "Respondents SWM and Sica willfully violated Section 206(2) of the Advisers Act, which prohibits investment advisers from engaging“in any transaction, practice, or course of business which operates as a fraud or deceit upon any client or prospective client.” Proof of scienter is not required to establish a violation of Section 206(2), but rather may rest on a finding of negligence. SEC v. Steadman, 967 F.2d 636, 643 n.5 (D.C.
Cir. 1992) (citing SEC v. Capital Gains Research Bureau, Inc., 375 U.S. 180, 195 (1963))... Read More

Penalties: $154,097.00
Respondent: Fortress Investment Management, LLC. and William M. Malloy, III.
Violation: As a result of the conduct described above, MWM willfully violated Section 203A of the Advisers Act by improperly registering with the Commission. Malloy willfully aided and abetted and caused MWM’s violation of Section 203A... Read More

Penalties: $50,000.00
Respondent: Steven E. Fishman
Violation: Respondent willfully aided and abetted and caused Formation Capital’s violations of Section 206(4) of the Advisers Act and Rule 206(4)-2 promulgated thereunder... Read More

Penalties: $35,000,000.00
Respondent: Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC. and Wells Fargo Advisors Financial Network, LLC.
Violation: Wells Fargo violated Section 206(4) of the Advisers Act and Rule 206(4)-7 thereunder by failing to adopt and implement policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent unsuitable recommendations in violation of the Advisers Act. Because of Wells Fargo’s inadequate training, compliance policies and procedures, and supervision, certain Wells Fargo financial advisors made unsuitable recommendations to their clients to buy and hold single-inverse ETFs in violation of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”). Accordingly, pursuant to Advisers Act Section 203(e)(6) and Exchange Act Section 15(b)(4)(E), Wells Fargo failed reasonably to supervise its financial advisors with a view to preventing the financial advisors’ violations of the antifraud provision... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Bradley Davis
Violation: Davis regularly received confidential reports showing the strong financial performance of Nordson's core adhesives division, the largest division at the company. Based on these reports, Davis allegedly purchased Nordson stock and options contracts prior to the company announcing favorable quarterly earnings that exceeded market expectations. According to the complaint, Davis sold his securities shortly after each of these earnings announcements, realizing over $850,000 in illicit profits from the rise in the Nordson's stock price. The SEC's complaint, filed in federal court in the Southern District of New York, charges Davis with violating the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder... Read More

Penalties: $207,500.00
Respondent: PixarBio Corp. et al.
Violation: The criminal charges against Reynolds arose from the same conduct alleged in the SEC's complaint against PixarBio, Reynolds, Stromsland, and Herod. The SEC's complaint alleged that PixarBio, Reynolds, and Stromsland misled investors with false claims about PixarBio's progress in developing a purported method of delivering non-opiate, post-operative pain medication. The complaint also alleged that Reynolds, Herod, and Stromsland engaged in a fraudulent scheme to acquire and merge PixarBio with a publicly traded company and to secretly manipulate the sales of shares in the new entity. The SEC previously obtained a preliminary injunction to stop the ongoing fraud and freeze assets held by Reynolds and PixarBio... Read More

Penalties: $9,786.00
Respondent: Shawn Severson
Violation: Severson violated Section 17(b) of the Securities Act, which prohibits publishing, giving publicity to, or circulating “any notice, circular, advertisement or communication which, though not purporting to offer a security for sale, describes such security for a consideration received or to be received, directly or indirectly, from an issuer . . . without fully disclosing the receipt, whether past or prospective, of such consideration and the amount thereof... Read More

Penalties: $8,816,887.00
Respondent: Cardinal Health, Inc.
Violation: Cardinal violated Section 13(b)(2)(A), which requires every issuer with a class of securities registered pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12 to make and keep books, records and accounts, which, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and disposition of the assets of the issuer... Read More

X