Five Charged with Attempted Manipulation of Amogear
On July 14, 2014, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation today announced charges against five individuals whose attempt to manipulate shares of Boston-based Amogear Inc. was caught by an FBI undercover operation. According to the SEC and criminal cases filed in federal court in Boston, the defendants knew that Amogear was a shell company without any real operations, but schemed to boost its price and profit by selling their own shares.
What the parties didn’t know was that the FBI controlled Amogear and used it to obtain evidence of attempted stock manipulation. To protect investors, the SEC suspended trading in Amogear’s securities on February 10, as the attempted stock manipulation was underway. Read More
SEC Obtains Judgment Against John Babikian
On July 8, 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced (“SEC”) announced a final judgment against defendant John Babikian in the Commission action styled, SEC v. John Babikian, Civil Action No. 14-CV-1740 (S.D.N.Y.). The Court entered the final judgment, to which Babikian consented without admitting or denying the allegations. The final judgment orders Babikian to pay a total of $3,730,000, comprised of $1,915,670 in disgorgement, together with prejudgment interest in the amount of $128,073, and a civil penalty in the amount of $1,686,257.
The final judgment also imposes a bar from participating in any offering of penny stock and enjoins John Babikian from recommending, directly or indirectly, the purchase of any U.S. publicly traded or quoted stock without simultaneously disclosing any plans or intentions to sell such stock within 14 days of the recommendation. Finally, the final judgment permanently enjoins Babikian from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)), Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder (17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5). Read More
Securities Lawyers Gone Wild – Charles Blackwelder Indicted
Charles Blackwelder, an Indiana lawyer and his daughter have been charged in connection with a $23 million Ponzi scheme that was allegedly targeting senior citizens. Blackwelder and his daughter, Cara Grumme, were charged with twenty felonies, including nine counts of securities fraud and four counts of securities fraud on a victim over the age of 60. Each of the felonies carries a minimum sentence of four years. The most amazing aspect of the scheme is that it continued for more than a decade and cost investors more than $23 million. Read More
SEC Settles Action Against Noble Executives Mark A. Jackson and James J. Ruehle
On July 7, 2014, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced that former Noble CEO Mark A Jackson and former Director and Division Manager of Noble’s Nigeria subsidiary James J. Ruehlen, have agreed to settle the SEC’s pending civil actions against them. The case had been set for a jury trial. Read More
The Role of the Go Public Attorney l Securities Lawyer 101
The role of the Go Public Attorney is one of the most important in the going public process. The Go Public Attorneys at Hamilton & Associates Law Group have provided private companies with their going public solutions for over ten years.
A skilled Go Public Attorney can design and implement the going public structure most beneficial to your company without the risks associated with reverse merger transactions. We have represented more than 300 market participants in securities law matters and going public transactions. Our experience includes issuers listing on stock exchanges as well those who elect to go public on the OTC Markets OTCQB or OTCQX. Read More
The Exchange Act Lawyer’s Role In Going Public Matters
Securities Lawyer 101
Form 10 registration statements and Exchange Act reporting are required by Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Securities Exchange Act”) under certain circumstances. Exchange Act reporting follows going public transactions when the issuer files a registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities Act). The Securities Exchange Act grants broad authority to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to oversee the securities industry. The SEC’s authority includes the power to register, regulate, and oversee brokerage firms, transfer agents, and clearing agencies; as well as self regulatory organizations like the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). Read More
Why Companies Going Public Need a Securities Lawyer
Companies going public must comply with federal and state securities laws. Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) and all state securities regulators require that all securities either be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) or be exempt from registration. The disclosures companies provide to investors allow them to tell their story but evolving rules and regulations apply to these disclosures even if a company is not publicly traded.
Even companies whose securities are not yet publicly traded must comply with federal and state securities laws. Securities laws apply to the issuance of shares to founders as well as investors. A securities lawyer can help the issuer comply with the various laws during the going public process.
Failure to consider these laws before going public can have significant consequences for the company and its management. These consequences include SEC or other enforcement action and rescission to investors. Read More
SEC Charges Five With Short Sale Violations
The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has charged five short sellers who were traders for committing short selling violations. According to the SEC, the short sellers were trading for themselves and Worldwide Capital Inc., a Long Island, N.Y.-based proprietary firm that earlier this year paid the largest-ever monetary sanction for Rule 105 violations. Worldwide Capital and its owner Jeffrey W. Lynn agreed to pay $7.2 million to settle SEC charges in March for violating Rule 105, which prohibits the short sale of an equity security during a restricted period – generally five business days before a public offering – and the subsequent purchase of that same security through the offering.
The SEC instituted settled administrative proceedings against Derek W. Bakarich, Carmela Brocco, Tina Lizzio, Steven J. Niemis, and William W. Vowell for violating Rule 105 by selling shares short during the restricted period and purchasing offering shares of the same securities they had shorted. They purchased the offering shares through accounts they opened in their names or names of alter ego corporate entities at large broker-dealers and then executed the short sales of the securities through an account in Worldwide’s name at different, smaller broker-dealers.
“These individuals shared in profits generated by transactions that violated important short selling regulations in place to protect the markets from manipulative trading activity,” said Andrew M. Calamari, director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office.
Each of the five traders agreed to settle the SEC’s charges and pay a collective total of nearly $750,000.
“When conducting these trades, these individuals did not comply with the law,” said Amelia A. Cottrell, associate director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office. “Now they must forfeit the profits they earned on their respective trades plus additional penalties.”
According to the SEC’s orders, Bakarich, Brocco, Lizzio, Niemis, and Vowell were selected by Lynn to conduct short sale trades for Worldwide Capital, which he created for the purpose of investing and trading his own money. The traders he chose to trade his capital pursued an investment strategy focused primarily on obtaining allocations of new shares of public issuers coming to market through secondary and follow-on public offerings at a discount to the market price of the company’s shares that were already trading publicly. They made short sales in advance of the offerings, hoping to profit by the difference between the price they paid to acquire the offered shares and the market price on the date of the offering. From approximately August 2009 to March 2012, Bakarich, Brocco, Lizzio, Niemis, and Vowell each violated the short sale rules in connection with at least nine covered offerings. They received ill-gotten gains ranging from approximately $16,000 to more than $200,000.
Each of the five traders agreed to cease and desist from violating Rule 105 without admitting or denying the findings in the SEC’s order. They agreed to disgorge all of their ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest and pay an additional penalty equal to 60 percent of the disgorgement amount:
Bakarich, who lives in Duluth, Ga., agreed to pay $16,231 in disgorgement, $757 in prejudgment interest, and a $9,739 penalty for a total of $26,727.
Brocco, who lives in East Meadow, N.Y., agreed to pay $215,233 in disgorgement, $27,056 in prejudgment interest, and a $129,140 penalty for a total of $371,429.
Lizzio, who lives in Boca Raton, Fla., agreed to pay $28,864 in disgorgement, $1,548 in prejudgment interest, and a $17,319 penalty for a total of $47,731.
Niemis, who lives in Jupiter, Fla., agreed to pay $130,842 in disgorgement, $5,893 in prejudgment interest, and a $78,505 penalty for a total of $215,240.
Vowell, who lives in Manasquan, N.J., agreed to pay $51,519 in disgorgement, $4,427 in prejudgment interest, and a $30,911 penalty for a total of $86,857.
For further information about short sale transactions, please contact Brenda Hamilton, Securities Attorney at 101 Plaza Real S, Suite 202 N, Boca Raton, Florida, (561) 416-8956, by email at [email protected] or visit www.securitieslawyer101.com. This securities law blog post is provided as a general informational service to clients and friends of Hamilton & Associates Law Group and should not be construed as, and does not constitute, legal and compliance advice on any specific matter, nor does this message create an attorney-client relationship. Please note that the prior results discussed herein do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Hamilton & Associates | Securities Lawyers
Brenda Hamilton, Securities Attorney
101 Plaza Real South, Suite 202 North
Boca Raton, Florida 33432
Telephone: (561) 416-8956
Facsimile: (561) 416-2855
www.SecuritiesLawyer101.com
NutraFuels Launches Extreme Energy Spray
COCONUT CREEK, FL, Jul 01, 2014 (Marketwired via COMTEX) — NutraFuels, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: NTFU), a manufacturer of oral spray dietary supplements, announced today that the company plans to launch its latest product, TapoutT XT Extreme Energy Oral Spray in the month of August. Read More
The SEC’s Cross-Border Security Swap Rules
The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) adopted the first of a series of rules and guidance on cross-border securities swap activities for market participants.
The SEC will use the new rules to finalizing the remaining proposals. Read More
SEC Announces Tick Size Plan
On June 25, 2014, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) announced its tick size plan whereby it ordered that the national securities exchanges and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) to act jointly to develop and file with the Commission a national market system plan. Read More
FINRA Brings Transparency to Rule 144A Corporate Debt Transactions
On June 30, 2014, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) began publicly disseminating Rule 144A transaction data in corporate debt securities, bringing transparency to a market. 144A transactions—resales of restricted corporate debt securities to large institutions called qualified institutional buyers (QIBs)—account for a significant portion of the volume in corporate debt securities. Read More
FINRA Fines Goldman Sachs Execution & Clearing $800,000
On July 1, 2014, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) announced that it had fined Goldman Sachs Execution & Clearing, L.P. $800,000 for failing to have reasonably designed written policies and procedures in place to prevent trade-throughs of protected quotations in NMS stocks from November 2008 through August 2011 in connection with trading in its proprietary alternative trading system, SIGMA-X. Read More
SEC Seeks to Reduce Gobbledygook Disclosures By: Securities Lawyer 101
This month, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) provided guidance related to the enhanced mutual fund disclosure amendments it adopted in 2009. The SEC’s guidance is based on comments the staff of the Division of Investment Management provided to a number of funds and their securities lawyers. Read More
Securities Lawyers Gone Wild – Marcus Luna
On June 27, 2014, the U.S. District Court of Nevada issued an order imposing sanctions against a securities attorney, Marcus Luna, three other individuals – Nathan Montgomery, Adam Daskivich, and David Murtha – and their businesses for their roles in a multi-million dollar scheme. Read More
SEC Charges 3 Regions Bank Executives
On June 25, 2014, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) announced fraud charges against three former senior managers of Regions Bank for intentionally misclassifying loans that should have been recorded as impaired for accounting purposes. As a result, the bank’s publicly-traded holding company overstated its income and earnings per share in its financial reporting. The SEC also entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with Regions Financial Corp., which substantially cooperated with the agency’s investigation and undertook extensive remedial actions.
Being Publicly Traded By: The Going Public Lawyers
After an issuer completes its going public transaction, an issuer that has filed a registration statement for an initial or direct public offering under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) must file annual, quarterly and current reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) under Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”).
Section 15(d) reporting requirements apply even if the public company does not list its securities on a national securities exchange or market and the company has not met the size thresholds requiring registration under Securities Exchange Act.
A Company’s periodic reports and filings with the SEC update and supplement public disclosures that the issuer made in its previous registration statement or other SEC filings. Issuers must file their periodic reports within a specified number of days after the end of each reporting period and file reports on Form 8-K after certain material events. Generally, Annual Reports on Form 10-K must be filed 90 days after the issuer’s year end. Quarterly Reports must be filed 45 days after the quarter and Reports on Form 8-K must be filed within 4 days of the triggering event. Read More
What is Plain English? Going Public Lawyers
Regulation C contains the Plain English requirements for SEC filings. For investors to make informed decisions, disclosure documents must impart complex information. Using plain English assures the orderly and clear presentation of complex information so that investors have the best possible chance of understanding the disclosures provided by public companies.
Plain English means analyzing and deciding what information investors need to make informed decisions, before words, sentences, or paragraphs are considered. A plain English document uses words economically and at a level the audience can understand. Its sentence structure is tight. Read More
FINRA Bars Success Trade Securities By: Brenda Hamilton Attorney
This month Success Trade Securities was ordered to pay $13.7 million in restitution and expelled by a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) hearing panel. Success Trade Securities allegedly ran a Ponzi scheme targeting professional athletes. FINRA claimed that many of the athletes that invested were financially inexperienced and included Detroit Pistons guard Brandon Knight, and Cleveland Browns cornerback Joe Haden. Read More
Transparency Bootcamp – Custodianship Disclosures In Reverse Mergers
Recently custodianship and/or receivership proceedings involving publicly traded companies have been in the spotlight because of the increasing number of fraudsters seeking these appointments so that they can create their own personal inventory of public shell companies for reverse merger transactions. Because custodians are fiduciaries all states impose disclosure obligations on any person seeking appointment as a custodian. As explained below, fraudsters with disciplinary history go through considerable lengths to conceal their backgrounds. Read More
Transparency Bootcamp – BrokerCheck 101 By: Brenda Hamilton Attorney
Any investor seeking to find out information about a penny stock should begin by investigating management, brokers and the promoters involved with the issuer. FINRA BrokerCheck provides a free online database about brokers and brokerage firms, as well as investment adviser firms and representatives. Investors can learn whether current or former persons involved with the issuer has been sanctioned by securities regulators. Read More
SEC Extends DTC Proposal Period By: Brenda Hamilton
On December 5, 2013, The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) submitted DTC proposals to change SR-DTC-2013-11 (“Proposed Rules”) pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Rule 19b-4 thereunder to the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). On March 10, 2014, DTC filed Amendment No 2 to the Proposed Rules. On March 19, 2014, the SEC published Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 for comment, and instituted proceedings to determine whether to approve or disapprove the DTC Proposals, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 (“Order Instituting Proceedings”). Read More
New OTCQB Requirements, Listing & Quotation – OTCQB Lawyer
Hamilton & Associates Law Group – Client Update
The OTC Markets Group recently established new eligibility standards for the securities companies to quoted on the OTCQB® Venture Stage Marketplace. OTCQB companies must comply with the new OTCQB eligibility requirements within 120 days after its fiscal year end. This new requirements include an annual certification and annual fees. Issuers with a March 31st fiscal year end must comply with the new OTCQB eligibility requirements by July 31, 2014. Companies that do not comply with the new procedures within the time allowed will be demoted to the OTC Pink tier.
OTCQB Annual Certification
Under the new eligibility requirements, each OTCQB company will be required to post an annual certification through the OTC Markets website stating: (i) the company’s reporting standard and describing the registration status of the company; (ii) that the company is current in its SEC reporting requirements and such information has been posted either on the SEC’s EDGAR database or the OTC Markets website; (iii) the identity of the law firm and/or securities attorneys involved in the preparation of the issuer’s Annual Report or Form 10-K; (iv) the company’s public profile posted on the OTC Markets website is current and complete; (v) the total number of shares outstanding and in the company’s public float as of the most recent fiscal year end; and (vi) the names and securities ownership of all officers, directors, and shareholders holding more than five percent of the company’s shares outstanding. Read More
Form S-1 Going Public Bootcamp – Going Public Lawyers
The process of “going public” with a SEC registration statement is complex and at times precarious. While going public offers many benefits it also comes with risks and quantities of regulations with which issuers must become familiar. Despite the risks even in a down economy, the U.S. markets remain an attractive source of capital for both domestic and foreign issuers. It is important for issuers to have an experienced securities attorney to help navigate through the process and deal with the Securities & Exchange Commission (“SEC”), Financial Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) & Depository Trust Company (“DTC”). Upon completion of a going public transaction, the company is subject to the regulations that apply to public companies, including those of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”) and Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”).
This blog post addresses common questions we receive about the going public process using Form S-1.
Going Public Lawyer Insights About DPOI’s & IPO’s
A private company going public is subject to three federal securities laws, each with its own unique requirements. The three laws are the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”), the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (”Sarbanes-Oxley”). In addition to the federal securities laws, companies going public are subject to state securities regulation of their securities public and private offerings. The Securities Act sets forth the regulations that govern the offer and sale of securities by an issuer and certain shareholders.
The Securities Act governs both private offerings such as those conducted under Regulation D and public offerings such as those registered on Form S-1, Form S-8 or Form S-4. Upon completion of a going public transaction, the Exchange Act imposes periodic reporting obligations including the filing of Form 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K.
For issuers who register a class of securities under the Securities Exchange Act in connection with their going public transaction, the Exchange Act imposes proxy rules requiring certain disclosures be made on Schedules 14A or 14C and certain procedures for the solicitation of shareholder votes. Read More
SEC Periodic Reports – Going Public Attorneys
Issuers become subject to the SEC’s periodic reporting requirements a number of ways including by filing a registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended or pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The SEC rules that apply to periodic reports require that publicly traded companies disclose a wealth of information to the public. Periodic reporting also requires that these reports be written in plain English. Understanding these reports helps investors make informed decisions regarding whether to buy, sell or hold a company’s securities.
Periodic reports provide issuers with the opportunity to provide shareholders with transparency by telling their story. Companies that provide materially false or misleading statements, or omit material information that is necessary to render a report not misleading in their periodic reports are subject to liabilities arising under federal and state securities laws. Investors can obtain a company’s Form 10-K, Form 10-Q and Form 8-K filings on the SEC’s EDGAR database. Read More
DPO-IPO Registration Statement Attorneys
Many private companies particularly small businesses are unable to locate an underwriter prior to filing a registration statement to go public. Registration statement attorneys often recommend that issuers use of a resale registration statement when they are unable to locate an underwriter. A direct public offering (“Direct Public Offering”) provides a viable solution to this dilemma. A Direct Public Offering allows a company to sell its shares directly to investors without the use of an underwriter. With a Direct Public Offering, the company files a registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to register a securities offering under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”).
Typically, in going public transaction Form S-1 (”S-1”) registration statements are used. A company can use a Form S-1 registration statement to register securities on its own behalf in an initial public offering, register securities on behalf of its selling security holders in a secondary offering or register securities on its own behalf as well as for selling security holders.
Using a Direct Public Offering to Go Public
All issuers qualify to file a registration statement on Form S-1 and it is the most common registration statement form used in going public transactions. Filing a Form S-1 registration statement in connection with a going public transaction eliminates many of the risks and expenses associated with reverse mergers including among other things, undisclosed liabilities, sketchy corporate records, DTC Chills, Global Locks and SEC trading suspensions. Read More
SEC Issues Trading Suspensions To Prevent Corporate Hijackings
On June 11, 2014, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission announced the temporary suspension of trading in the securities of LifeHealthCare, Inc. (LFHE), Smartlinx, Inc. (SMLK) and Total Apparel Group, Inc. (TLAG). Read More
SEC Initiates Proceedings Against Six Issuers to Prevent Corporate Hijackings
This week the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) announced it deemed it necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors that public administrative proceedings be instituted pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against six issuers, The Bank Holdings, Community Valley Bancorp, Genemen, Inc., GWS Technologies, Inc., Homeland Precious Metals Corp., and NuRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. In the past two years, the Commission has revoked and/or suspended more than 1000 issuers involved in corporate hijackings. Read More
