Securities Fraud

Advisors in the Spotlight: Ex-SAC Capital’s Martoma on Trial for $276M Insider Trading Scam, Financial Industry Recruiters Say LinkedIn Hurts Their Business, & A Fugitive Bank Director Wanted for Securities Fraud is Arrested

Published on: January 18, 2014 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Former SAC Capital Portfolio Manager Mathew Martoma On Trial for Securities Fraud

Mathew Martoma, the ex-SAC Capital Advisors portfolio manager accused in the insider trading scam that involved $276 million in Wyeth and Elan stocks, is now on trial. Martoma allegedly used tips from a doctor involved in Alzheimer drug trials. The government says that due to the information SAC liquidated a $700 million position and sold its stocks in the firms, which allowed it to make money while avoiding losses.

In court this week, one doctor testified that he was surprised that Martoma knew so much about the results of a clinic trial before they were publicly disclosed. Already, prosecutors have filed charges against 83 people and four SAC entities over what the US is calling the largest illegal trade in our nation’s history. There have been several convictions.

Securities Fraud Court Matters

Published on: January 14, 2014 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

While a district court allowed the securities fraud claims brought under securities law against LightSpeed Environmental, Inc. & other defendants to go forward, the claims brought against the company under Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act were thrown out. The securities case is Wang v. LightSpeed Environmental, Inc.

The court said that while the plaintiff, Tonglin Wang, sufficiently alleged justifiable reliance, specific misrepresentations, and scienter, so that certain claims could proceed, he did not succeed in his claims that there was a prospectus or a public offering or that there was any verbal exchange made about the prospectus.

Wang is a Chinese businessman who wanted to invest in a US entity to obtain immigration status here via a federal program. In 2011, two individuals, who were LightSpeed agents (Wang did not know this), purportedly told him they would act as his translators and advisors. He then was introduced to David Tarrant, CEO of ASG. He had the majority of voting shares in LightSpeed.

Ex-Goldman Sachs Trader Fabrice Tourre’s Request for New Civil Trial in RMBS Fraud Case is Denied

Published on: January 10, 2014 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The federal district court in Manhattan has turned down former Goldman Sach’s (GS) trader Fabrice Tourre’s request that he get a new civil securities fraud trial after he was found liable on seven counts of federal securities law violations related to his involvement in the firm’s sale of the Abacus 2007-AC1, which is a synthetic collateralized debt obligation that was backed by residential mortgage-backed securities. Goldman has already paid a $550 million fine over the matter.

The district court is saying that his claim that there was no evidence backing a finding that he violated Section 17(a)(20) of the Securities Act by getting property or money via the alleged fraud can’t be supported. The court noted that to prove liability this section of the Act does not make it necessary for the SEC to show that Tourre got a “fraud bonus”—only that he got the property or money through omission or material statement. The court said Tourre could have given evidence to show that the compensation he received from Goldman would have been the same without such a transaction, but since he didn’t put on a case during his trial the jury was free to infer otherwise.

The court noted that there was sufficient evidence backing the jury’s finding that the ex-Goldman Sachs trader’s conduct abetted and aided violations of SEC regulations. Also, the court is rejecting Tourre’s contention that he should get a new trial because he believes that the other court acted inappropriately when it took away from the jury the question of whether the swaps agreements involved were security based swap agreements within the meaning of securities law. This court said that for securities law purposes, the swap agreements were security-based swap agreements, and it granted summary judgment to the SEC on this.

FINRA to Go After Rogue Brokers, & Includes REITs, Municipal Bonds, & Frontier Markets Among Its Enforcement Priorities for 2014

Published on: January 3, 2014 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority is setting up a team made up of six members to look at stockbrokers with long records of investor complaints and violations, as well as those that engage in “cockroaching”-which involves brokers moving among beleaguered firms. The crack down comes amidst pressure from lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

According to an analysis of state securities records by The Wall Street Journal last year, between 2005 and 2012 there were over 5,000 licensed securities brokers who had worked with at least or more firms that had been expelled by FINRA. The analysis also revealed that there were brokers who, even in the wake of being targeted by numerous arbitration claims or having declared bankruptcy more than once, have managed to keep working in the industry.

FINRA announced this new initiative this week in a letter to approximately 4,180 broker-dealers that are registered with the SRO. It said it would use the Broker Migration model, a computerized analytic system, to look at brokers who have gone from an expelled brokerage firm to other firms.

Ex-SAC Capital Manager Steinberg is Convicted of Securities Fraud & Insider Trading

Published on: December 23, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A federal jury has convicted former SAC Capital portfolio manager Michael Steinberg for insider trading, conspiracy, and securities fraud. Prosecutors contend that he traded on confidential information that he received from another employee.

Steinberg is one of eight employees at the hedge fund’s Sigma Capital Management division charged with insider trading and the first to go to trial. Six of the others pleaded guilty, including SAC analyst Jon Horvath, who prosecutors said is the one that gave Steinberg the nonpublic information. Horvath, who turned witness for the prosecution, has admitted to exchanging illegal tips with people at different firms. He said that Steinberg pressured him to provide “proprietary” information about technology stocks.

Steinberg is accused of making a number of trades, including ones before Dell’s earnings report in August 2008 went out. He reportedly netted $1 million in trades from this after he started shorting the computer company’s stock following a tip that Dell’s gross margins would fall short of Wall Street’s expectations. Similar tips that Steinberg received about Nvidia reportedly netted the hedge fund over $400,000.

$3.8M Colorado Securities Scam Defrauded Over 40 Elderly Seniors

Published on: November 24, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission is charging Gary C. Snisky with defrauding over 40 senior investors in a $3.8 million Colorado securities scheme. The regulator contends that Snisky, who describes himself as an institutional trader, used insurance agents to sell interests in Arete LLC, which was supposedly more profitable and safer than annuities. He is accused of targeting mainly retired annuity holders, many of whom live in in the state.

According to the SEC, investors were told that their money would go toward buying government-backed agency bonds at discount rates and that the bonds would be used in overnight banking sweeps. Instead, Snisky misappropriated about $2.8 million of investor money to pay for his mortgage and pay sales folk their commissions.

Snisky is accused of bringing in experienced insurance salespersons who could source their existing client base of annuity holders and get them to invest in Arete. He described Arete as an “annuity plus” investment that investors could take principal from and earn interest without penalty (even after a decade) while still benefitting from guaranteed annual returns of up to 7%. The SEC says that the purported institutional trader stressed that the investments were safe and claimed he could get agency bonds backed by the government at a reduced rate and without paying fees for middlemen. He also allegedly drafted documents that salespeople used as offering materials to attract investors, showed the staff fake investor account statements to make it appear as if there were actual earnings, and organized seminars where he met with salespeople and investors.

SEC Goes After Alleged Ponzi Scammers

Published on: November 15, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission is pursuing securities fraud charges against Wendy Ko and Yin Nan Wang and certain entities over their alleged involvement in a Ponzi-like scam. The regulator is asking for an asset freeze against Velocity Investment Group, its managed funds, and Rockwell Realty Management, Inc. These entities are controlled by Wang and Ko.

The SEC claims that the two of them offered and sold over $150 million securities as unsecured promissory notes through Velocity and its unregistered investment funds. The offerings promised a substantial investment return rate. That said, to fulfill these interest obligations the funds needed to make returns higher than the market average.

Wang purportedly ordered that an accountant be given financial information that included material overstatements of fund receivables. He also is accused of publishing false financial data on a website.

SEC Looking to Simplify Disclosure Rules to Minimize “Information Overload” for Investors

Published on: October 16, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission will review corporate disclosure rules to possibly get rid of disclosure rules that are creating “information overload” for investors. Speaking to the National Association of Corporate Directors, SEC Chairwoman Mary Jo White said that as the quantity and types of issues that companies have to disclose become greater and “more detailed,” she wonders whether investors need or benefit from all that information-or if ‘information overload’ makes it hard for customers to glean what they should know to make the best investment choices for them.

Commission rules, company efforts, and congressional mandates seeking to prevent lawsuits are what have led to such extensive disclosures. Now, the SEC may consider a possible overhaul after a study of company filing-rules, which was mandated by the 2012 Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, is released. The JOBS Act mandates that the regulator figure out how to simplify rules for smaller companies.

White said that certain disclosure details are no longer necessary in the wake of such information that is now widely available online, including via social media. She pointed to examples of information being disclosed that may not be as relevant now as before, such as the ratio of earnings to fixed charges or dilution disclosure requirements. White also spoke about how it might be prudent to begin getting certain information to investors sooner than what current rules and forms mandate for timeframes or whether this could become an added burden to companies.

FINRA Accuses John Carris Investments of Pump-and-Dump Scam

Published on: September 30, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority is charging John Carris Investments LLC with misleading and bilking investors. It seeks a cease and desist order against the financial firm and George Carris, its CEO, to immediately stop soliciting customers to buy Fibrocell Science, Inc. stock without giving them the correct disclosures. The SRO contends that in May 2013, JCI made solicitations to customers without revealing that Carris and another principal of the firm were selling their shares.

In an amended complaint, FINRA accused Carris, JCI, and five other firm principals of committing securities violations and other fraud. The SRO alleges that as JCI played the role of placement agent for FIbrocell, the firm and Carris artificially inflated Fibrocell stock’s price by pre-arranging trading and making Fibrocell stock buys that were not authorized in the accounts of customers.

FINRA contends that JCI and Carris fraudulently sold notes and stock in Invictus Capital, Inc., the firm’s parent company, without disclosing that its financial state was poor. The SRO believes that there was no reason to believe that investors would gain anything economically and Carris and JCI misled investors of Invictus by paying dividends to the latter’s early investors with funds that came from the sales of the company’s securities. Also, FINRA is accusing JCI of putting out false documentation that did not show payments the firm made for Carris’s personal spending and not remitting employee payroll taxes to the US Treasury.

Groupon Loses Dismissal Bid Over IPO Securities Fraud Case

Published on: September 26, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

A district court judge has ordered Groupon Inc. to face a securities lawsuit filed against it accusing the deal-of-the-day coupon company of misleading investors regarding its financial state right before its IPO in 2011. The Illinois-based company had sought to have the securities fraud case brought by investor Michael Carter Cohn, dismissed. Cohn wants his claim to get class action securities status.

The investor claims that Groupon committed securities fraud and used refund accounting that was not allowed to spike revenues in a prospectus related to its initial public offerings, as well as in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. According to U.S. District Judge Charles Norgle in Chicago, the claims “present plausible violations.” Norgle also turned down requests by Morgan Stanley (MS) and Goldman Sachs (GS), and Credit Suisse (CS) to throw out the claims against them. These banks arranged the public offering.

On March 30, 2012-not long after opening at $28 in Nasdaq stock exchange trading on November 4, 2011-Groupon reported a “material weakness” in its financial controls, as well as first reported quarterly sales as a company that was now publicly traded were not as high as stated earlier because of high refunds received by merchants. This lowered revenue during 2011’s last quarter to $492 million-that’s a $14.3 million difference. The company’s shares by November 13, 2012 hit $2.63 dollars.