Securities and Exchange Commission v. Siegel
| Securities and Exchange Commission |
| Barry Siegel |
| 1:2024cv07210 |
| September 24, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Ronnie Abrams |
| Securities/Commodities |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 77 Securities Fraud |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 26, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO DEFENDANT BARRY SIEGEL: IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendant is permanently restrained and enjoined from violating, directly or indirectly, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) [15 U.S.C. 78j(b)] and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5 [17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5], by using any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails, or of any facility of any national securities exchange, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security: As further set forth by this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that pursuant to Sections 21(d)(5) and (d)(7) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 78u(d)(5) and (d)(7)] Defendant is liable for disgorgement of $112,868.95, representing net profits gained as a result of the conduct alleged in the Complaint, together with prejudgment interest thereon in the amount of $9,975.97. The Court finds that sending the disgorged funds to the United States Treasury, as ordered below, is consistent with equitable principles. The Court further imposes a civil penalty in the amount of $112,868.95 pursuant to Section 21A(a)(2) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 78u 1(a)(2)]. Defendant shall satisfy these obligations by paying $235,713.87 to the Securities and Exchange Commission within 30 days after entry of this Final Judgment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that this Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter for the purposes of enforcing the terms of this Final Judgment. For the reasons set forth at length in SEC v. Moraes, the Court remains concerned with the "SEC's continued and misguided practice of restraining speech." No. 22-cv-8343, 2022 WL 1574011, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 28, 2022). However, given Defendant Siegel's willingness to sign the consent decree, consistent with SEC v. Romeril, 15 F.4th 166, 172 (2d Cir. 2021), the Court hereby approves this Judgment. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 9/26/2024) (tg)
|
|
***NOTICE TO COURT REGARDING PROPOSED JUDGMENT. Document No. #4 Proposed Judgment was reviewed and approved as to form. (nd)
|
|
CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Ronnie Abrams. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions..(vf)
|
|
Magistrate Judge Henry J. Ricardo is designated to handle matters that may be referred in this case. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (vf)
|
|
Case Designated ECF. (vf)
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jeffrey Harris Lichtman on behalf of Barry Siegel..(Lichtman, Jeffrey)
|
|
Filing 5
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jeffrey Benson Einhorn on behalf of Barry Siegel..(Einhorn, Jeffrey)
|
|
Filing 4
PROPOSED JUDGMENT. Document filed by Securities and Exchange Commission..(Chase, Celeste) Proposed Judgment to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.
|
|
Filing 3
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Celeste Ann Chase on behalf of Securities and Exchange Commission..(Chase, Celeste)
|
|
Filing 2
CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Apps, Antonia)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Barry Siegel. Document filed by Securities and Exchange Commission..(Apps, Antonia)
|
Access additional case information on PACER
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 Southern 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
| Search for this case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Siegel | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Barry Siegel | |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey Benson Einhorn |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey Harris Lichtman |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Securities and Exchange Commission | |
| Represented By: | Antonia Marie Apps |
| Represented By: | Celeste Ann Chase |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | 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.
