The SEC alleges that David M. Connolly induced investors to buy shares in real estate investment vehicles he created through his firm Connolly Properties Inc. He promised investors monthly dividends based on cash-flow profits from rental income at the apartment buildings as well as the growth of their principal from the appreciation of the property. However, the real estate investments did not produce the projected dividends, and Connolly instead made Ponzi-like dividend payments to earlier investors using money from new investors. Connolly, who lives in Watchung, N.J., also siphoned off at least $2 million in investor funds for his personal use.

“David Connolly presented himself to investors as a successful real estate investment manager with a track record of paying consistent, high returns,” said George S. Canellos, Director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office. “In truth, Connolly’s operation was essentially a shell game intended to raise additional funds from new or existing investors in order to perpetuate his fraudulent scheme.”

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey, which conducted a parallel investigation of the matter, today announced that Connolly was indicted on one count of securities fraud among other criminal charges.

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in New Jersey, none of Connolly’s securities offerings in the investment vehicles were registered with the SEC as required under the federal securities laws. Connolly began offering the investments in 1996 and ultimately raised in excess of $50 million from more than 200 investors in more than 25 investment vehicles. However, beginning in at least 2006, Connolly misrepresented to investors that their funds would be used exclusively for the property related to the particular vehicle in which they invested. Connolly instead commingled the funds in bank accounts that he alone controlled and used for a variety of purposes that weren’t disclosed to investors, including $2 million in payments he made to himself that vastly exceeded any dividends to which he would be entitled through his ownership stake. Between 2007 and 2010, Connolly also wrote checks to “cash” in excess of $2.5 million. Even after Connolly stopped making dividend payments to investors in April 2009, he still continued to pay himself dividends as well as a $250,000 “salary” out of investor funds.

The SEC alleges that Connolly lacked sufficient revenues from rental income at the apartment buildings, so he continued to raise millions of dollars for new investment vehicles. He used the funds to pay purported monthly cash-flow dividends in excess of 10 percent to investors in older investment vehicles. Connolly refinanced properties and improperly used the cash proceeds to continue the scheme, which ultimately collapsed in 2009 when new investor funds dried up and rental income was insufficient to support payments on the mortgages. The properties owned by the investment vehicles were forced into foreclosure, wiping out the equity of the investors.

The SEC’s complaint charges Connolly with violating Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The SEC’s complaint seeks permanent injunctive relief, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains with prejudgment interest, and financial penalties.

The SEC alleges that Nicholas Louis Geranio worked behind the scenes to create eight U.S.-based companies used to raise money through the sale of Regulation S stock, which is exempt from SEC registration under the securities laws because it is offered solely to investors located outside the United States. Geranio handpicked the management for the companies, primarily Keith Michael Field of Sherman Oaks, Calif., who served as an officer, director, or investor relations representative for each company and also is charged in the SEC’s complaint. Geranio then set up consulting arrangements through his firms — The Good One Inc. and Kaleidoscope Real Estate Inc. — so he could instruct management on how to run the companies and raise money offshore. Geranio extracted consulting fees from the companies, which generally had few or no employees, little or no office space, and no sales or customers.

The SEC alleges that Field drafted misleading business plans, marketing materials, and website information about the companies that were provided to investors as part of fraudulent solicitation efforts by teams of telemarketers operating in boiler rooms that Geranio recruited primarily in Spain. The boiler rooms used high-pressure sales tactics and false statements about the companies to raise more than $35 million from investors. Meanwhile, Geranio instructed Field and others to buy and sell shares in some of the companies to create an illusion of trading activity and manipulate upwards the price of the publicly-traded stock.

“Geranio covertly set up companies and manipulated the market for their stock to profit from aggressive offshore boiler room activity,” said Stephen L. Cohen, Associate Director in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. “Geranio pulled the strings while Field scripted the show for the boiler rooms to bring a payday to everyone but the investors.”

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Geranio was the subject of a previous SEC enforcement action in 2000. In his latest misconduct, he concealed his role from investors and the public at all times by acting through The Good One and Kaleidoscope. The scheme lasted from April 2007 to September 2009. Geranio began by locating and acquiring shell companies to create the issuers used in the scheme: Blu Vu Deep Oil & Gas Exploration Inc., Green Energy Live Inc., Microresearch Corp., Mundus Group Inc., Power Nanotech Inc., Spectrum Acquisition Holdings Inc., United States Oil & Gas Corp., and Wyncrest Group Inc. Geranio then appointed management for these companies, in some cases turning to business associates, friends, or others. For example, the former CEO of Blu Vu was someone Geranio met while kite surfing in Malibu.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Geranio worked behind the scenes to keep the companies’ publicly-traded shares trading at prices conducive to the boiler room sales. He did this by directing Field, personal friends, and others to open accounts and buy or sell shares in at least five of the companies as part of matched orders and manipulative trades that created the false impression of active trading and market value in these stocks. The manipulative trades allowed the boiler rooms to sell the Regulation S shares to overseas investors at higher prices.

The SEC alleges that boiler room representatives recruited by Geranio induced investors by using aggressive techniques consistent with boiler room activity. For instance, they promised immediate and substantial investment returns, convinced investors that they needed to purchase the shares immediately or miss the grand opportunity altogether, and threatened legal action if an investor did not agree to purchase shares that the representatives believed the investor had already agreed to purchase. The boiler rooms also used “advance fee” solicitations, telling investors that only if they purchased shares in one of these companies would the boiler room agree to sell their other shares. Many of the investors were elderly and living in the United Kingdom.

According to the SEC’s complaint, investors were directed to pay for their Regulation S stock by sending money to U.S.-based escrow agents. As arranged by Geranio, the escrow agents paid 60 to 75 percent of the approximately $35 million raised from investors to the boiler rooms as their sales markups, kept 2.5 percent as their own fee, and paid the remaining proceeds back to the companies that Geranio created. The companies (or in some cases the escrow agents) then funneled approximately $2.135 million of the proceeds back to Geranio through The Good One and Kaleidoscope in the form of consulting fees, and paid Field approximately $279,000.

The SEC alleges that Geranio also assisted in diverting $240,000 in investor funds toward an undisclosed down payment on a property to start a Hawaiian wedding planning company.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that Geranio, Field, The Good One and Kaleidoscope violated Sections 17(a)(1) and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5(a) and (c) thereunder. The complaint alleges that Field also violated Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act and aided and abetted the companies’ violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder, and Geranio is liable as a control person of The Good One and Kaleidoscope under Exchange Act Section 20(a). The SEC is seeking financial penalties, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest, penny stock bars, and permanent injunctions against all of the defendants, as well as officer and director bars against Geranio and Field. The complaint seeks disgorgement and prejudgment interest against relief defendant BWRE Hawaii LLC based on its alleged receipt of investor funds.

Martin Currie agreed to pay a total of nearly $14 million to the SEC and the United Kingdom’s Financial Services Authority (FSA) to settle the charges that it steered a U.S. publicly-traded fund called The China Fund Inc. into an investment to bolster the hedge fund. The hedge fund had acquired a significant and largely illiquid exposure to a single Chinese company. Martin Currie directly alleviated the hedge fund’s liquidity problems by deciding to use the China Fund — to the detriment of the fund and its shareholders — in a bond transaction that reduced the hedge fund’s exposure.

“The misconduct in this case strikes at the heart of the fiduciary relationship between an investment adviser and its client. Advisers must treat each client with undivided and disinterested loyalty, and must make full and fair disclosure of all material conflicts of interest,” said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.

Bruce Karpati, Co-Chief of the SEC’s Asset Management Unit, added, “The China Fund’s board was led to believe it was making a routine investment in a Chinese company. But in reality, the investment proved harmful to fund shareholders while sparing an affiliated hedge fund from its own problems during the financial crisis.”

According to the SEC’s order instituting settled administrative proceedings against Martin Currie, the firm managed the China Fund side-by-side with the hedge fund through its SEC-registered investment adviser subsidiaries. These funds and other Martin Currie accounts made similar investments in Chinese companies under the direction of two senior portfolio managers based in Shanghai. One company was Jackin International, a printer-cartridge recycling company listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.

According to the SEC’s order, in June 2007, Martin Currie’s lead portfolio manager in Shanghai caused the hedge fund to purchase $10 million of unlisted illiquid Jackin bonds that deviated from the fund’s normal equities-trading strategy. Martin Currie improperly classified those bonds as cash in its risk-management system, and as a result the liquidity and credit risks associated with the hedge fund’s exposure to Jackin weren’t revealed until November 2008 after the hedge fund had purchased additional Jackin bonds. By that time, the hedge fund’s total investment in Jackin had come close to breaching the fund’s limit on portfolio exposure to a single issuer.

The SEC’s order says that as the global financial crisis deepened, the hedge fund faced a significant increase in redemption requests by its investors, exacerbating the fund’s liquidity problems. At the same time, Jackin was starved for capital to continue funding its operations and make debt payments to bondholders such as the hedge fund. In response to the hedge fund’s overlapping problems, Martin Currie decided to use the China Fund to purchase $22.8 million in convertible bonds from a Jackin subsidiary. The subsidiary instantly lent $10 million of the proceeds to Jackin, which in turn redeemed $10 million in otherwise-illiquid bonds held by the troubled hedge fund. The bond transaction closed in April 2009.

According to the SEC’s order, Martin Currie officials were aware that the China Fund’s involvement presented a direct conflict of interest and may have been unlawful. In an attempt to cure that conflict, they sought and obtained approval from the China Fund’s board of directors. However, they failed to disclose that proceeds of the fund’s investment would be used to redeem bonds held by another client — the hedge fund. Martin Currie also failed to sufficiently consider whether the investment’s rationale and pricing were in the China Fund’s best interests.

The SEC’s order noted that the China Fund’s bond investment in the Jackin subsidiary turned out poorly. In April 2011, the China Fund sold the bonds for about 50 percent of their face value for a loss of $11.5 million.

The SEC’s order found that Martin Currie engaged in separate improper conduct by failing to follow the China Fund’s policies and procedures for fair valuing the convertible bonds at issue. Between April 2009 and October 2010, Martin Currie advised the China Fund’s board to value the convertible bonds at cost ($22.8 million) while failing to disclose information that was relevant for the board to fair value the bonds.

The SEC charged Martin Currie with certain violations of the antifraud, affiliated transaction, reporting, and compliance provisions of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and the Investment Company Act of 1940. Without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings, Martin Currie agreed to settle the SEC’s charges by paying a penalty of $8.3 million and accepting censures and cease-and-desist orders against future violations. Martin Currie also agreed to pay a penalty of £3.5 million ($5.6 million in U.S. dollars) to settle the FSA’s action. In reaching the settlement, the SEC took into account that Martin Currie had compensated the China Fund for losses and expenses arising from the misconduct. Martin Currie cooperated with the SEC’s investigation and implemented several remedial measures, including severing association with its lead Shanghai-based portfolio manager and making enhancements to its compliance program.

The SEC alleges that Kilpatrick and Beasley, who were trustees to the pension funds, solicited and received $125,000 worth of private jet travel and other perks paid for by MayfieldGentry Realty Advisors LLC, an investment adviser whose CEO Chauncey Mayfield was recommending to the trustees that the pension funds invest approximately $117 million in a real estate investment trust (REIT) controlled by the firm. Despite their fiduciary duties, neither Kilpatrick and Beasley nor Mayfield and his firm informed the boards of trustees about these trips and the conflicts of interest they presented. The funds ultimately voted to approve the REIT investment, and MayfieldGentry received millions of dollars in management fees.

“It is a disappointing day when pension fund trustees such as ex-Mayor Kilpatrick and others corrupt the investment process by selling out hardworking police officers, firefighters and other municipal employees for the price of a few vacations and paltry extras like concert tickets and rounds of golf,” said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, members of Kilpatrick’s administration began to exert pressure on Mayfield in early 2006 after he supported Kilpatrick’s opponent in his 2005 re-election and hired that candidate’s daughter at MayfieldGentry. Beasley met with Mayfield in February 2006 and told him he was “in the dog house” with Kilpatrick and offered to help him “clear the air.” Throughout 2007, Mayfield appeared before the boards of trustees for Detroit’s public pension funds recommending the REIT investment.

Meanwhile, the SEC alleges, MayfieldGentry began footing the bills for trips taken by Kilpatrick, Beasley and others that extended beyond business. In January 2007, Beasley demanded and Mayfield agreed to pay more than $3,000 for hotel rooms in Charlotte, N.C. for Beasley, Kilpatrick, and others. Beasley told Mayfield that the reason for the trip was to inspect a building recently acquired by one of the pension funds, but in fact Beasley and Kilpatrick never inspected the building. Mayfield knew that Beasley and Kilpatrick never inspected the building, but did not ask any further questions about the matter.

According to the SEC’s complaint, the non-business travel continued:

• In April 2007, MayfieldGentry paid for Kilpatrick, Beasley, and their associates to travel by private jet to Las Vegas, where they enjoyed luxury hotel accommodations, two concerts, three rounds of golf, meals, and massages. The Las Vegas trip cost more than $60,000.
   
• In July 2007, MayfieldGentry paid more than $24,000 for a private jet to take Kilpatrick, Beasley’s son and others to Tallahassee, Fla., where Kilpatrick had a second home.
   
• In October 2007, MayfieldGentry paid more than $34,000 for a private jet to fly Kilpatrick and his wife to and from Bermuda, and Kilpatrick’s father and his girlfriend back from Bermuda.

The SEC alleges that neither Kilpatrick nor Beasley nor Mayfield nor MayfieldGentry told anyone associated with the pension funds about any of the travel. The boards of trustees for the funds thus voted to invest approximately $117 million with Mayfield and his firm without the knowledge that they had supplied Kilpatrick, Beasley, and their associates with the extravagant travel and perks during the preceding 10 months.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that the defendants violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5(a), 10b-5(b) and 10b-5(c) thereunder. The SEC also alleges that MayfieldGentry and Chauncey Mayfield violated Sections 17(a)(1), 17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933. In addition, the SEC charges that MayfieldGentry and Chauncey Mayfield violated Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and Kilpatrick and Beasley aided and abetted those violations. The SEC seeks disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, penalties, and permanent injunctions, including an injunction against Kilpatrick and Beasley to prohibit them from participating in any decisions involving investments in securities by public pensions.

The SEC alleges that Mohammed Mark Amin, prior to a company board meeting, learned confidential information about expanding business opportunities for DuPont Fabros Technology Inc., which develops and manages highly-specialized and secure facilities that maintain large computer servers for technology companies through long-term leases with them. Amin tipped his brother Robert Reza Amin, cousin Michael Mahmood Amin, and long-time friend and business manager Sam Saeed Pirnazar with nonpublic details about three new leases that DuPont Fabros was negotiating and three loans it was obtaining to develop new facilities. The three illegally traded on the basis of that inside information. Reza Amin went on to tip his friends and business associates Mary Coley and Ali Tashakori, who also illegally traded. Together they made more than $618,000 in insider trading profits when DuPont Fabros stock rose 36 percent after the company issued an earnings release highlighting the development of these new facilities.

Mark Amin and the five others agreed to settle the SEC’s charges by collectively paying nearly $2 million.

“Mark Amin disregarded his board responsibilities and betrayed shareholders at DuPont Fabros in favor of giving his circle of relatives and friends an inside scoop to trade on nonpublic information,” said John M. McCoy III, Associate Regional Director of the SEC’s Los Angeles Regional Office.

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Mark Amin is a motion picture executive with his own production company. He lives in Los Angeles and is credited as the producer or executive producer for more than 75 Hollywood movies including Frida, Eve’s Bayou, and four movies in the Leprechaun series. In 2007, Amin began serving on the board of directors at DuPont Fabros, a real estate investment trust (REIT) whose common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. DuPont Fabros develops and operates wholesale data centers that maintain computer servers for such companies as Microsoft, Facebook, and Google. Amin resigned from the board in February 2011.

The SEC alleges that Mark Amin first learned nonpublic information about new leases and loans pending for DuPont Fabros during a board meeting in December 2008, and he further discussed their status in a phone conversation with the company’s CEO on Jan. 7, 2009. That same day, Mark Amin tipped his cousin Michael Amin of Los Angeles and his friend and business manager Pirnazar of Manhattan Beach, Calif. In fact, Mark Amin initially asked Michael to lend him money and discussed Michael’s purchasing DuPont Fabros stock for both of them in Michael’s name.

The SEC further alleges that on February 4, Mark Amin received materials for a special board meeting to approve the three new loans. The next morning, he tipped this inside information to his brother Reza Amin of Los Angeles, who began buying DuPont Fabros stock just 17 minutes after receiving the tip. The board approved the three new loans later that day.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Reza Amin tipped Coley, a British citizen who lives in Los Angeles with whom he has a daughter. They are also business partners in a small chain of video stores. On February 6, he brought Coley into the local E*Trade branch office where he maintained a brokerage account so she could open a new brokerage account to purchase DuPont Fabros shares. Reza Amin also tipped his friend Tashakori, who lives in Rolling Hills, Calif. As a self-employed licensed general contractor, Tashakori was engaged in various construction projects for both Mark and Reza Amin. Tashakori purchased DuPont Fabros stock based on Reza Amin’s tip.

According to the SEC’s complaint, DuPont Fabros issued its 2008 earnings release after the market closed on Feb. 11, 2009, and highlighted that it had obtained the three new loans and entered into the three new leases. From January 8 to February 10, Michael Amin had purchased 145,000 DuPont Fabros shares that yielded him $318,646 in insider trading profits when the stock price soared upon news of the earnings release. Pirnazar purchased 10,500 shares and made $19,915 in illicit profits. From February 5 to February 11, Reza Amin purchased 214,600 DuPont Fabros shares for an eventual illegal profit of $241,767. Coley purchased 20,050 shares and realized insider trading profits of $23,690. Tashakori purchased 15,000 shares and profited $14,479.

The SEC’s complaint charges the Amins, Pirnazar, Coley, and Tashakori with violating Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5(a) and (c) thereunder. Without admitting nor denying the allegations, they have agreed to collectively pay disgorgement of $618,497, prejudgment interest of $78,000, and penalties totaling $1,236,994. They also have agreed to the entry of a final judgment permanently enjoining them from violating Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5. Mark Amin has additionally agreed to a bar from serving as an officer or director of a public company for 10 years. The settlement is subject to court approval.

The SEC alleges that Angela Milliard wired money to her boyfriend’s brokerage account so she could illegally trade on nonpublic details she learned while working as a legal assistant on Semitool Inc.’s then-secret deal with a Silicon Valley company. She also tipped her father Kenneth Milliard with the confidential information. He then traded on the nonpublic information and tipped his sons, who also made trades. The morning the acquisition was announced, the Milliards sold their shares for illicit profits of more than $67,000.

Angela and Kenneth Milliard have agreed to settle the SEC’s charges by paying more than $175,000.

“Angela Milliard exploited her access to confidential merger and acquisition information to illicitly enrich herself and her family,” said Marc Fagel, Director of the SEC’s San Francisco Regional Office. “As a member of a legal department entrusted with sensitive deal documents, she had a duty to safeguard that information, not trade on it.”

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Montana, Angela Milliard first gained access to confidential deal information in October 2009, when she learned that Semitool and the acquiring company – Applied Materials Inc. – had entered into advanced merger negotiations. After learning that the tender offer was to happen in mid-November at a nearly 30 percent premium over Semitool’s then-trading price, she wired money to her boyfriend’s brokerage account and used it to surreptitiously buy shares of Semitool.

The SEC alleges that Angela Milliard tipped her father, who also purchased Semitool shares and encouraged his sons to do the same, which they did. They reaped their illegal insider trading profits following the public announcement of the merger on Nov. 17, 2009.

The Milliards settled the SEC’s charges without admitting or denying the allegations. Angela Milliard agreed to pay full disgorgement of her trading profits totaling $20,355 plus prejudgment interest of $1,614.60 and a penalty of $54,022.11. Kenneth Milliard agreed to pay full disgorgement of his and his sons’ trading profits totaling $47,805 plus prejudgment interest of $3,765.19 and a penalty of $47,805.11.

The SEC alleges that Kevin Sepe of Miami masterminded the schemes involving two microcap companies — Recycle Tech and HydroGenetics — with the help of three licensed attorneys and several others who collectively reaped illegal profits of more than $3.5 million. Aventura, Fla.-based attorney Ronny Halperin assisted Sepe in both schemes. The Recycle Tech scheme involved a promotional campaign to pump the price and volume of the purported home container building company’s stock in the wake of the Haiti earthquake. The HydroGenetics scheme took millions of unregistered shares of the company — purportedly in the business of acquiring emerging alternative energy companies — and improperly converted its debt into free-trading shares that were dumped on the investing public.

Six of the 11 individuals involved have agreed to settlements ordering them and companies they own to collectively pay more than $3.2 million.

“Sepe, Halperin, and others chose to ignore the laws governing stock sales and play by their own set of rules,” said Eric I. Bustillo, Director of the SEC’s Miami Regional Office. “Some of these individuals were attorneys and corporate officers who should have known better, and we will continue to crack down on any such gatekeepers who put investors at risk with their harmful activities to manipulate the markets.”

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Miami, Sepe and Halperin evaded registration requirements by converting backdated and fabricated promissory notes into unrestricted stock of Recycle Tech, quoted on the Pink Sheets. With help from Recycle Tech’s CEO and president Ryan Gonzalez, they conducted a pump-and-dump scheme from January to March 2010 by enlisting the help of two promoters — Anthony Thompson and Jay Fung — who touted Recycle Tech in their newsletters. David Rees, a Utah-based attorney, became involved in the scheme when he drafted an improper legal opinion letter authorizing the issuance of unrestricted Recycle Tech shares.

The SEC alleges that the participants collectively made more than $1 million in illegal profits through the scheme, which touted that Recycle Tech signed a binding letter of intent to build up to 50 container homes in Haiti following the earthquake. However, Recycle Tech failed to disclose to investors that it had no funds, no finished container homes, and minimal operations. Sepe orchestrated, coordinated, and funded the scheme and sold Recycle Tech stock along with Halperin and Rees without any exemption from registering those securities with the SEC. Gonzalez, who lives in Miami, made the scheme possible by incorporating a sham private company, turning the public shell of that company into Recycle Tech through a reverse merger, and signing various fraudulent documents to authorize the issuance of Recycle Tech securities. Gonzalez also drafted and issued false press releases used to hype Recycle Tech stock. Thompson and Fung — through their firms OTC Solutions LLC and Pudong LLC — touted Recycle Tech in their newsletters without disclosing that they were selling shares or adequately disclosing the compensation they received for their touts.

According to the SEC’s other complaint filed in Miami, Sepe and Halperin schemed with Miami-based attorney Melissa Rice and others to illegally issue and liquidate 90 million unregistered shares of HydroGenetics from April 2008 until at least June 2009. Sepe headed a group that purchased convertible debt of a South Florida publicly-held company. He then formed HydroGenetics and parsed out portions of the convertible debt to friends, family, and others who converted the debt to stock that they then sold publicly. Sepe sold HydroGenetics stock without any exemption from registration the securities with the SEC. Halperin was the HydroGenetics CEO and a director. He executed corporate resolutions to help issue millions of shares of HydroGenetics stock, including 11 million shares to his daughter who he told to sell it and funnel a portion of the illegal proceeds back to him. Rice assisted Sepe in converting convertible debt to unrestricted HydroGenetics shares, and wrote four opinion letters improperly opining that the Rule 144 safe harbor was applicable and the debt could be converted to unrestricted HydroGenetics shares. Rice also sold her shares of HydroGenetics stock.

The SEC alleges that three other Miami residents also received illegal profits in the HydroGenetics scheme: Luz Rodriguez, who worked as an office administrator and assistant to Sepe; Howard Ettelman, a provider of accounting services to various companies owned by Sepe and Rice; and Seth Eber, a self-employed jeweler who was on the list of individuals that Sepe provided Rice to assign shares.

The SEC further alleges that Charles Hansen III of Lighthouse Point, Fla., succeeded Halperin as HydroGenetics CEO in April 2009 and signed five corporate resolutions authorizing HydroGenetics to illegally issue stock that Rice then used along with her opinion letter to facilitate the scheme.

The individuals agreeing to settle the SEC’s charges in the complaints without admitting or denying the allegations are Sepe, Halperin, Rees, Rice, Ettelman, and Hansen.

• Sepe agreed to disgorgement of $1,416,466.16, prejudgment interest of $126,761.86, and penalties of $185,000 as well as a permanent bar from participating in an offer or sale of penny stocks.
• Halperin agreed to disgorgement of $427,609.95, prejudgment interest of $33,595.33, and a penalty of $100,000 as well as a permanent penny stock bar and a five-year officer and director bar. He also agreed to surrender 1.97 million shares of HydroGenetics stock.
• Rees agreed to disgorgement of $5,982, prejudgment interest of $406.25, and a penalty of $7,500 as well as a one-year prohibition from providing professional legal services connected to the offer or sale of securities.
• Rice agreed to disgorgement of $422,445, prejudgment interest of $39,239.18, and a penalty of $60,000 as well as a five-year penny stock bar and three-year prohibition from providing professional legal services connected to the offer or sale of securities.
• Ettelman agreed to disgorgement of $32,667, prejudgment interest of $3,093.27, and a penalty of $25,000 as well as a five-year penny stock bar and the surrender of 300,000 shares of HydroGenetics stock.
• Hansen agreed to a $37,500 penalty.

Two companies — Charter Consulting Group (owned and controlled by Sepe) and West Coast Investments Enterprises (owned by Rice) — were named as relief defendants in the SEC’s complaints because they received a portion of the illegal trading profits in the schemes. They each settled the case, with Charter agreeing to disgorgement of $150,000 and prejudgment interest of $9,125 and West Coast agreeing to disgorgement of $125,000 and prejudgment interest of $11,262.71.

Separately, the SEC issued orders to suspend trading in the securities of Recycle Tech and HydroGenetics and to institute administrative proceedings against each company to determine whether the registration of their securities should be revoked or suspended based on their failure to file required periodic reports.

The SEC also instituted separate settled administrative proceedings against HydroGenetics in which the company, without admitting or denying the findings, consented to an order requiring it to cease and desist from committing or causing violations of the registration provisions of the federal securities laws.

The SEC alleged that the insider trading occurred in advance of at least 11 merger and acquisition announcements involving clients of the law firm where the attorney — Matthew H. Kluger — worked. He and the trader — Garrett D. Bauer — were linked through a mutual friend now identified as Kenneth T. Robinson, who acted as a middleman to facilitate the illegal tips and trades. Kluger and Bauer used public telephones and prepaid disposable mobile phones to communicate with Robinson in an effort to avoid detection. Robinson, now also charged, cooperated in the SEC’s investigation.

Bauer, Kluger, and Robinson each agreed to give up their ill-gotten gains plus interest in order to settle the SEC’s charges. Those amounts under the terms of their consent agreements are approximately $31.6 million for Bauer, $516,000 for Kluger, and $845,000 for Robinson.

“Bauer, Kluger and Robinson schemed to outsmart law enforcement by structuring their relationships and communications to avoid detection and frustrate insider trading detection mechanisms,” said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. “They were ultimately unsuccessful due to the SEC’s sustained efforts to combat hard-to-detect insider trading, particularly among lawyers and other gatekeepers who have solemn duties to maintain the confidentiality of information entrusted to them.”

In parallel criminal actions brought by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey, Bauer, Kluger, and Robinson have all pled guilty and are scheduled to be sentenced on June 4, 2012.

Click Here for SEC Complaint.

The SEC alleges that Garth R. Peterson, who was a managing director in Morgan Stanley’s real estate investment and fund advisory business, had a personal friendship and secret business relationship with the former Chairman of Yongye Enterprise (Group) Co. – a Chinese state-owned entity with influence over the success of Morgan Stanley’s real estate business in Shanghai. Peterson secretly arranged to have at least $1.8 million paid to himself and the Chinese official that he disguised as finder’s fees that Morgan Stanley’s funds owed to third parties. Peterson also secretly arranged for him, the Chinese official, and an attorney to acquire a valuable Shanghai real estate interest from a Morgan Stanley fund. Peterson was acquiring an interest from the fund but negotiated both sides of the transaction. In exchange for offers and payments from Peterson, the Chinese official helped Peterson and Morgan Stanley obtain business while personally benefitting from some of these same investments. Peterson’s deception, self-dealing, and misappropriation breached the fiduciary duties he owed to Morgan Stanley’s funds as their representative.

Peterson agreed to a settlement of the SEC’s charges in which he will be permanently barred from the securities industry, pay more than $250,000 in disgorgement, and relinquish his interest in the valuable Shanghai real estate (currently valued at approximately $3.4 million) that he secretly acquired through his misconduct. The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a related criminal case against Peterson.

“Peterson crossed the line not once, but twice. He secretly bribed a government official to illegally win business for his employer and enriched himself in violation of his fiduciary duty to Morgan Stanley’s clients,” said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. “This case illustrates the SEC’s commitment to holding individuals accountable for FCPA violations, particularly employees who intentionally circumvent their company’s internal controls.”

Kara Novaco Brockmeyer, Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s FCPA Unit, added, “As a rogue employee who took advantage of his firm and its investment advisory clients, Peterson orchestrated a scheme to illegally win business while lining his own pockets and those of an influential Chinese official.”

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Peterson’s violations occurred from at least 2004 to 2007. His principal responsibility at Morgan Stanley was to evaluate, negotiate, acquire, manage and sell real estate investments on behalf of Morgan Stanley’s advisers and funds. He was terminated in 2008 due to his FCPA misconduct.

The SEC alleges that Peterson led Morgan Stanley’s effort to build a Chinese real estate investment portfolio for its real estate funds by cultivating a relationship with the Chinese official and taking advantage of his ability to steer opportunities to Morgan Stanley and his influence in helping with needed governmental approvals. Morgan Stanley thus partnered with Yongye on a number of significant Chinese real estate investments. At the same time, Peterson and the Chinese official expanded their personal business dealings both in a real estate interest secretly acquired from Morgan Stanley as well as by investing together in Chinese franchises of well-known U.S. fast food restaurants. Peterson failed to disclose these investments in annual disclosures that Morgan Stanley required him to make as part of his employment.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Peterson openly credited the Chinese official with helping obtain approvals required from other Chinese government entities for a deal to close. He wrote to several Morgan Stanley employees in response to an e-mail discussing the terms of one of Yongye’s purported investments, “Everyone pls keep in mind the big picture here. YY gave us this deal. … So we owe them a favor relating to this deal. … This should be very easy and friendly.” In another e-mail a week later, Peterson described “YYI” as “our friends who are coming in because WE OWE THEM A FAVOR.”

The SEC alleges that a Morgan Stanley compliance officer specifically informed Peterson in 2004 that employees of Yongye, a Chinese state-owned entity, were government officials for purposes of the FCPA. Peterson also received at least 35 FCPA compliance reminders from Morgan Stanley, but nonetheless committed the FCPA violations.

The SEC’s complaint charges Peterson with violations of the anti-bribery, books and records and internal control provisions of the FCPA, and with aiding and abetting violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Peterson consented to a court order requiring him to disgorge $254,589 and relinquish to a court-appointed receiver the interest he secretly acquired from Morgan Stanley’s fund in the Jin Lin Tiandi Serviced Apartments. Peterson’s interest has a current estimated value of approximately $3.4 million. The proposed settlement is subject to court approval. Peterson also has consented to permanent industry bars based on the anticipated entry of the injunctions against him and his criminal conviction.

The SEC acknowledges the assistance of the Fraud Section of DOJ’s Criminal Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Morgan Stanley, which is not charged in the matter, cooperated with the SEC’s inquiry and conducted a thorough internal investigation to determine the scope of the improper payments and other misconduct involved.

Click Here for a Copy of the SEC Complaint.