Former Apple In-House Attorney Files Motion to Dismiss Insider Trading Charges
"He [Levoff] challenges the United States Attorney to identify the federal criminal law—a law passed by Congress—that he violated when he allegedly traded Apple stock based on information he gleaned as an in-house Apple lawyer and senior executive," Kevin Marino, founding partner at Marino, Tortorella & Boyle in Chatham, New Jersey, wrote in the motion to dismiss.
April 28, 2020 at 04:37 PM
3 minute read
A former in-house lawyer at Apple Inc. accused of insider trading filed a motion to dismiss Monday, arguing that insider trading has been validated through case law rather than a statute that makes prosecuting it unconstitutional.
In February 2019, Gene Levoff was charged with securities fraud and wire fraud in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. Specifically, the U.S. Justice Department claims that Levoff sold stock he owned in the company during blackout periods. Prosecutors also claim Levoff "misappropriated material, nonpublic information about Company-1's [Apple Inc.] financial results and then executed trades involving the company's stock."
The alleged scheme, according to prosecutors, allowed Levoff to make $27,000 on some trades and avoid losses of approximately $377,000 on others.
In a motion to dismiss the charges, Levoff's attorney, Kevin Marino, founding partner at Marino, Tortorella & Boyle, in Chatham, New Jersey, asked the court to dismiss the claims because insider trading has never been made into law by Congress.
"He [Levoff] challenges the United States Attorney to identify the federal criminal law—a law passed by Congress—that he violated when he allegedly traded Apple stock based on information he gleaned as an in-house Apple lawyer and senior executive," Marino wrote in the motion to dismiss.
In the motion, Marino said the definition of insider trading is "judge-made."
"Every element of the crime and the scope of regulated individuals subject to it was divined by judges, not elected legislators. This alone renders the criminal prosecution of insider trading unconstitutional," Marino said.
In the motion, Marino claims insider trading fails the "constitutional test for acceptable civil common law."
"Insider trading law does not fit within the narrow categories of common law 'necessary to protect federal interests,' which courts have traditionally limited to rights and obligations of the United States, international disputes, admiralty cases, and otherwise unique circumstances unrelated to insider trading," Marino wrote in the brief.
Marino declined to comment on the case outside of what is in the motion to dismiss.
Courtney Howard, Daniel Shapiro and Heather Suchorsky are the prosecutors in the case. The U.S. Department Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey did not have a comment on the motion.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDigging Deep to Mitigate Risk in Lithium Mine Venture Wins GM Legal Department of the Year Award
5 minute readElaine Darr Brings Transformation and Value to DHL's Business
PepsiCo's Legal Team Champions Diversity, Wellness, and Mentorship to Shape a Thriving Corporate Culture
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250