Securities and Exchange Commission v. Summit Breeze Haven Exchange Ltd
Plaintiff: Securities and Exchange Commission
Defendant: Summit Breeze Haven Exchange Ltd
Case Number: 1:2026cv03990
Filed: August 27, 2026
Court: U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
Presiding Judge: Cyrus Y Chung
Referring Judge: Nina Y Wang
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Securities Violation
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 27, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 27, 2026 Filing 5 SUMMONS REQUEST as to Summit Breeze Haven Exchange Ltd re #1 Complaint by Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission. (Foster, Michael)
August 27, 2026 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER REFERRING CASE: This case is referred to Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung for non-dispositive matters. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b), this case is referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to (1) convene a scheduling conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and enter a scheduling order meeting the requirements of D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.2, (2) conduct such status conferences and issue such orders necessary for compliance with the scheduling order, including amendments or modifications of the scheduling order upon a showing of good cause, and (3) hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other non-dispositive motions. Court-sponsored alternative dispute resolution is governed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6. On the request of the Parties by motion, this Court may direct the Parties to engage in an early neutral evaluation, a settlement conference, or another alternative dispute resolution proceeding. Alternatively, the Magistrate Judge, at his discretion, may convene such early neutral evaluation and/or settlement conferences and direct related procedures as may facilitate resolution of this case without the necessity of a motion or prior authorization of the undersigned. Counsel for the Parties and all counsel who may later enter an appearance shall review and familiarize themselves with the undersigned's Practice Standards, as well as the Practice Standards of the assigned Magistrate Judge. By Judge Nina Y. Wang on 8/27/2026. Text Only Entry (nywlc10, )
August 27, 2026 Filing 3 Magistrate Judge consent form issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c). (eguth, )
August 27, 2026 Filing 2 Case assigned to Judge Nina Y. Wang and drawn to Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung. Text Only Entry (eguth, )
August 27, 2026 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Summit Breeze Haven Exchange Ltd Attorney Michael D. Foster added to party Securities and Exchange Commission(pty:pla), filed by Securities and Exchange Commission. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Foster, Michael)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Summit Breeze Haven Exchange Ltd
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Securities and Exchange Commission
Represented By: Michael D. Foster
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Summit Breeze Haven Exchange Ltd
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?