From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Secs. & Exchange Comm'n v. Peterson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 9, 2011
Case No. CV 11-01143 ODW (JEMx) (C.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. CV 11-01143 ODW (JEMx)

09-09-2011

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. CURTIS PETERSON, ERIC MAHER, RONALD WHITE, and EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL, LLC, Defendants, and CURTIS INTERNATIONAL EXPRESS, INC. and ANN SCOTT, Relief Defendants.

Peter F. Del Greco Counsel for Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission


[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT OF

PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND

OTHER RELIEF AGAINST

DEFENDANT RONALD WHITE

The Securities and Exchange Commission having filed a Complaint and Defendant Ronald White ("Defendant White") having entered a general appearance; consented to the Court's jurisdiction over Defendant White and the subject matter of this action; consented to entry of this judgment (the "Judgment") without admitting or denying the allegations of the Complaint (except as to jurisdiction); waived findings of fact and conclusions of law; and waived any right to appeal from this Judgment:

I.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendant White and Defendant White's agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this Judgment by personal service or otherwise are 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 Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, 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:

(a) to employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud;
(b) to make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; or
(c) to engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person.

II.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendant White shall pay disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, prejudgment interest thereon, and a civil penalty pursuant to Section 21(d)(3) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(3). The Court shall determine the amounts of the disgorgement and civil penalty upon motion of the Commission. Prejudgment interest shall be calculated from September 1,2009, based on the rate of interest used by the Internal Revenue Service for the underpayment of federal income tax as set forth in 26 U.S.C. § 6621(a)(2). In connection with the Commission's motion for disgorgement and/or civil penalty, and at any hearing held on such motion: (a) Defendant White will be precluded from arguing that he did not violate the federal securities laws as alleged in the Complaint; (b) Defendant White may not challenge the validity of this Consent or this Judgment; (c) solely for the purposes of such motion, the allegations of the Complaint shall be accepted as and deemed true by the Court; and (d) the Court may determine the issues raised in the motion on the basis of affidavits, declarations, excerpts of sworn deposition or investigative testimony, and documentary evidence, without regard to the standards for summary judgment contained in Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In connection with the Commission's motion for disgorgement and/or civil penalty, the parties may take discovery, including discovery from appropriate non-parties.

III.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Consent is incorporated herein with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein, and that Defendant White shall comply with all of the undertakings and agreements set forth therein.

IV.

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 Judgment.

V.

There being no just reason for delay, pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Clerk is ordered to enter this Judgment forthwith and without further notice.

Presented by:

Peter F. Del Greco

Counsel for Plaintiff

Securities and Exchange Commission

HONORABLE OTIS D. WRIGHT II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Secs. & Exchange Comm'n v. Peterson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 9, 2011
Case No. CV 11-01143 ODW (JEMx) (C.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2011)
Case details for

Secs. & Exchange Comm'n v. Peterson

Case Details

Full title:SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. CURTIS PETERSON, ERIC…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Sep 9, 2011

Citations

Case No. CV 11-01143 ODW (JEMx) (C.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2011)