Financial Enforcement Actions | Week of July 04 to July 10

Enforcement Report July 04-10 feat image

Enforcement Report July 04 - 10

CFPB

5 Enforcement Documents

$0.00 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: My Loan Doctor LLC and Edgar Radjabli
Violation: Under the CFPA, it is unlawful for any covered person to engage in a deceptive act or practice in connection with any transaction with a consumer for a consumer-financial product or service or the offering of a consumer-financial product or service. 12 U.S.C. §§ 5531(a), 5536(a)(1)(B). 50. A practice is deceptive if (1) there is a representation or omission of information that is likely to mislead consumers acting reasonably under the circumstances and (2) that information is material to consumers... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Timemark, Inc., Timothy Lenihan, Sr., Mark Nagler, and Casey Gassaway
Violation: The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) commenced this civil action on [date] to obtain injunctive and monetary relief and civil penalties from Timemark Solutions, Inc., Timothy Lenihan, Sr., Mark Nagler, and Casey Gassaway. The Complaint alleges violations of the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 6101 et seq., and its implementing rule, the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), 16 C.F.R. Part 310, as well as violations of Section 1036(a)(1)(A) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA), 12 U.S.C. § 5536(a)(1)(A), in connection with Defendants telemarketing and offering and sale of debt-relief services to consumers with federal student-loan debt. The Bureau and Defendants agree to entry of this Stipulated Final Judgment and Order (Order) to settle and resolve all matters in dispute arising from the conduct alleged in the Complaint... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Timemark, Inc., Timothy Lenihan, Sr., Mark Nagler, and Casey Gassaway
Violation: The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (Bureau) commenced this civil action on [date] to obtain injunctive and monetary relief and civil penalties from Timemark Solutions, Inc., Timothy Lenihan, Sr., Mark Nagler, and Casey Gassaway. The Complaint alleges violations of the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 6101 et seq., and its implementing rule, the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), 16 C.F.R. Part 310, as well as violations of Section 1036(a)(1)(A) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA), 12 U.S.C. § 5536(a)(1)(A), in connection with Defendants telemarketing and offering and sale of debt-relief services to consumers with federal student-loan debt. The Bureau and Defendants agree to entry of this Stipulated Final Judgment and Order (Order) to settle and resolve all matters in dispute arising from the conduct alleged in the Complaint... Read More

FTC

3 Enforcement Documents

$0.00 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: ALIMENTATION COUCHE-TARD INC. 4204 Industriel Blvd. Laval, Quebec H7L 0E3, Canada, and CROSSAMERICA PARTNERS LP 600 Hamilton Street, Suite 500 Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101
Violation: "Plaintiff brings this action under Sections 5(l) and 16(a)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(l) and 56(a)(1), as amended, against Defendant Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc. (“Couche-Tard”) and Defendant CrossAmerica Partners LP (“CAPL”), to obtain civil penalties for Defendants’ violations of a Decision and Order (“Order”) and an Order to Maintain Assets (“OMA”) issued by the Commission. 2. Defendant Couche-Tard is a multinational operator of retail fuel (i.e., gasoline and diesel) outlets with associated convenience stores doing business under the Circle K brand, among others. At all times relevant to this complaint, Defendant Couche-Tard indirectly owned Plaintiff brings this action under Sections 5(l) and 16(a)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(l) and 56(a)(1), as amended, against Defendant Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: American Student Loan Consolidators
Violation: Falsely promised to forgive student loans, lower monthly payments, and reduce interest rates... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: SuperGoodDeals.com, Inc.
Violation: Seeking to capitalize on the recent demand for personal protective equipment (“PPE”), Defendants began marketing masks, respirators, and other PPE through their website in March 2020. Defendants promised consumers that the PPE was “in stock” and would ship the next day. 10. Defendants’ next-day shipping promises were, in many cases, false. In fact, Defendants frequently waited weeks to provide “next-day” shipping, failed to inform consumers of the delay, and ignored persistent consumer questions and refund demands... Read More

FINRA

2 Enforcement Documents

$100,000.00 in Fines

Penalties: $100,000.00
Respondent: Chardan Capital Markets, LLC
Violation: Chardan failed to enforce written supervisory procedures reasonably designed to achieve compliance with provisions of the Research Rules that require firms to manage conflicts of interest between research analysts and those engaged in investment banking services... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Karen Lynn Carlin
Violation: Carlin refused to provide on-the-record testimony that had been requested pursuant to FINRA Rule 8210, in violation of FINRA Rules 8210 and 2010... Read More

CFTC

2 Enforcement Documents

$923,013.00 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Mark Miller
Violation: Miller managed and was an Associated Person (“AP”) of Foremost, a registered Introducing Broker (“IB”). Miller had a power of attorney over several proprietary accounts owned in whole or in part by one or more of Miller and other family members (collectively, “Miller family accounts”), as well as certain Foremost customers. During the Relevant Period, Miller abused the power of attorney over at least one customer’s accounts (“Customer A”) and defrauded Customer A by engaging in unauthorized trading and misappropriation to benefit Foremost, Miller, and his family members. Miller’s unauthorized trading in futures and options involved the use of fictitious sales. This misconduct caused over seven hundred thousand dollars in harm to Customer A... Read More

Penalties: $923,013.00
Respondent: Foremost Trading LLC
Violation: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission”) has reason to believe that from in or about February 1, 2014 to at least August 31, 2016 (“Relevant Period”), Foremost Trading LLC (“Foremost” or “Respondent”), in part by and through the acts of one of its principals, violated Sections 4b(a)(1)(A) and (C), 4c(a)(1)-(2), 4c(b), and 4o(1)(A) and (B) of the Commodity Exchange Act (“Act”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 6b(1)(A), (C); 6c(a)(1)-(2); 6c(b); 6o(1)(A), (B) (2018), and Commission Regulations (“Regulations”) 1.38(a), 33.10(a) and(c), 155.4(b)(2), 166.3, 17 C.F.R. §§1.38(a); 33.10(a), (c); 155.4(b)(2); 166.3 (2019). Therefore, the Commission deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted to determine whether Respondent engaged in the violations set forth herein and to determine whether any order should be issued imposing remedial sanctions... Read More

SEC

24 Enforcement Documents

$18,970,373.57 in Fines

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Zvi Feiner, et al.
Violation: The SEC's complaint, filed on September 19, 2019, alleged that Feiner, FNR, and Feiner's partner, Erez Baver, raised more than $10 million from at least 62 investors to acquire nursing homes and assisted living facilities throughout the Midwest. According to the complaint, the defendants falsely told investors that the investments were low-risk and would generate high returns, and also misappropriated investor funds to pay distributions to earlier investors and for their personal use. The complaint also named Feiner's company Netzach Investments LLC and Baver's company Cedarbrook Management, Inc. as relief defendants... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Orthofix International N.V
Violation: On April 30, 2018, the Secretary, pursuant to delegated authority, published a Notice of Proposed Plan of Distribution and Opportunity for Comment (“Notice”)1 pursuant to Rule 1103 of the Commission’s Rules on Fair Fund and Disgorgement Plans (“Commission’s Rules”).2 The Notice advised interested persons that they could obtain a copy of the Proposed Plan of Distribution (the “Plan”) from the Commission’s public website or by submitting a written request to Keshia W. Ellis, Esq., United States Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-5876. The Notice also advised that all persons desiring to comment on the Plan could submit their comments, in writing, within 30 days of the Notice. The Commission received no comments on the Plan during the comment period. On June 22, 2018, the Commission issued an Order Approving the Plan of Distribution... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: RALPH C. GREAVES, Esq.,
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted against Ralph C. Greaves (“Respondent” or “Greaves”) pursuant to Rule 102(e)(3)(i) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: ZVI FEINER, FNR HEALTHCARE, LLC, and EREZ BAVER
Violation: The SEC's complaint, filed on September 19, 2019, alleged that Feiner, FNR, and Feiner's partner, Erez Baver, raised more than $10 million from at least 62 investors to acquire nursing homes and assisted living facilities throughout the Midwest. According to the complaint, the defendants falsely told investors that the investments were low-risk and would generate high returns, and also misappropriated investor funds to pay distributions to earlier investors and for their personal use. The complaint also named Feiner's company Netzach Investments LLC and Baver's company Cedarbrook Management, Inc. as relief defendants... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Sims, et al
Violation: The complaint alleged that Sims and Procopio falsely told investors they had special access to trade platforms used by governments, corporations, and wealthy investors to buy vast sums of currency, usually $500 million or more, at a discounted price. Sims and Procopio allegedly told investors they could "piggyback" their money on these large trading platforms and reap huge returns with "absolutely no risk." However, neither the financial instruments nor the trading platforms existed. In actuality, Sims and Procopio allegedly used nearly all of the investor funds for their own personal expenses, including cars, jewelry, travel, and golf outings. The SEC's complaint further alleged that Geaves aided and abetted the scheme by, among other things, allowing investors to deposit money into his attorney trust account, which gave the scheme a cloak of legitimacy. Greaves then allegedly transferred most of these funds to Sims and Procopio despite knowing that they were misleading investors... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Luke C. Zouvas et al.
Violation: According to the SEC's complaint, filed on April 25, 2016, Larson obtained controlling shares of Crown Dynamics Corp., a shell company that merged with a private entity. With the assistance of Zouvas, who served as general counsel for the company, Larson allegedly transferred Crown shares to his nominees. He then paid $400,000 for a "call center" to promote Crown and placed manipulative trades in his own brokerage account to create the appearance of market interest in the stock. The complaint further alleges that Robb prepared materially misleading press releases about the company's business success, and that Larson's nominees sold Crown shares and wired most of the sale proceeds - at least $865,000 - to accounts Larson controlled... Read More

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

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

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Yong (Michael) Chen
Violation: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against Yong (Michael) Chen (“Chen”) (“Respondent”)... Read More

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

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

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

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

Penalties: $74,417.00
Respondent: BNB Wealth Management, LLC
Violation: "As a result of the conduct described above, Respondent willfully violated Section 206(2) of the Advisers Act, which makes it unlawful for any investment adviser, directly or indirectly, to “engage in any transaction, practice or course of business which operates as a fraud or deceit upon any client or prospective client.” Scienter is not required to establish a violation of Section 206(2), but rather a violation 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. 180,194-95 (1963)). As a result of the conduct described above, Respondent willfully violated Section 206(4) of the Advisers Act and Rule 206(4)-7 thereunder, which require a registered investment adviser to adopt and implement written compliance policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violations of the Advisers Act and the rules thereunder."... Read More

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

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

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

Penalties: $18,545,896.00
Respondent: Wilmington Trust Corporation
Violation: On September 11, 2014, the Commission issued an Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a Cease-and-Desist Order (the “Order”)1 against Wilmington Trust Corporation (the “Respondent” or “WTC”). According to the Order, the administrative proceeding arose out of false and misleading disclosures by WTC concerning its accruing loans past due 90 days or more over multiple quarters during 2009 and 2010, its non-accruing loans in the third quarter of 2009, and its reserves for loan losses in the third and fourth quarters of 2009... Read More

Penalties: $350,060.57
Respondent: BENJAMIN ALDERSON and BRADLEY HAMILTON,
Violation: The Commission may enforce the Court’s judgment for disgorgement and prejudgment interest by moving for civil contempt (and/or through other collection procedures authorized by law) at any time if Defendant fails to make such payment as required by paragraph III hereof. Defendant shall pay post judgment interest on any delinquent amounts pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961. The Commission shall hold the funds, together with any interest and income earned thereon (collectively, the “Fund”), pending further order of the Court... Read More

Penalties: N/A
Respondent: Sky Resort International Limited and Median Group, Inc. (f/k/a China Media Group Corporation),
Violation: As discussed in more detail above, both Respondents are delinquent in their periodic filings with the Commission, have repeatedly failed to meet their obligations to file timely periodic reports, and failed to heed delinquency letters sent to them by the Division of Corporation Finance requesting compliance with their periodic filing obligations or, through their failure to maintain a valid address on file with the Commission as required by Commission rules, did not receive such letters. As a result of the foregoing, Respondents failed to comply with Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder... Read More

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

X