U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission v. Spongetech Delivery Systems, Inc. et al
| U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission |
| Jack Halperin, Steven Moskowitz, Joel Pensley, RM Enterprises International, Inc., George Sperenza and Spongetech Delivery Systems, Inc. |
| 1:2010cv02031 |
| May 5, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Dora Lizette Irizarry |
| Securities/Commodities |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 77 Securities Fraud |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
351
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS -- For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") issued on August 3, 2015, by the Hon. Robert M. Levy, U.S.M.J., is hereby adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, the SEC's motion for damages is granted and defendant Michael Metter is held jointly and severally liable for: (1) disgorgement in the amount of $52,236,995.00; (2) prejudgment interest based on the IRS rate fro m May 5, 2010 to the date of entry of this judgment; and (3) a civil penalty of $6,133,540.00. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment against defendant Michael Metter in accord with this Order. However, this case is not closed and shall remain open for further proceedings. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 09/30/2015. (Irizarry, Dora)
|
|
Filing
340
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN ITS ENTIRETY - Various motions for disbursements were made by named parties in this action and other parties in interest. This court referred the motions for a Report and Recommendation ("R & R" ) to then-United States Magistrate Judge Joan M. Azrack, which was issued on December 24, 2014. Some parties timely objected. For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, and, upon due consideration, the R & R is adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, Solution Funding's Motion for Disbursement is granted and, having found that Solution Funding has a priority secured interest, it is awarded all of the funds in the CRIS Account in satisfaction of its $2.5 mil lion judgment against BTR, plus prejudgment interest to be calculated as of the date of the entry of the judgment. Further, the SEC is entitled to a $5,190,000 disgorgement judgment against BTR, plus prejudgment interest to be calculated as of the date of the entry of the judgment; however the SEC's disgorgement judgment is subordinate to Solution Funding's judgment. The Motions for Disbursement filed by the other claimants are denied. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in accord with this Electronic Order and the Attached Memorandum and Order. This Order does not dispose of the case as there is pending a motion for damages and it remains open. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 3/31/2015. (Irizarry, Dora)
|
|
Filing
112
ORDER granting in part, staying in part, and denying in part 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction - For the reasons set forth in the ATTACHED WRITTEN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, plaintiff's motion for the issuance of a preliminary injunction against the named defendants is granted in part, stayed in part, and denied, in part, without prejudice. The parties are admonished to adhere to the timetables set forth by the court in the Preliminary Injunction Order issued with the Attached Written Memorandum and Order. SO ORDERED by Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 3/14/2011. (Irizarry, Dora)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
