Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Uboh

SEC Penalties, Sanctions Are Civil, Do Not Implicate Double Jeopardy Which Was Waived

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

MEMORANDUM & ORDER In this civil action, commenced on April 15, 2021, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) alleges that defendants Ubong Uboh (“Mr. Uboh”) and Tyler Crockett (“Mr. Crockett”) participated in fraudulent schemes in violation of federal securities laws. (ECF No. 1, Compl.) The conduct alleged in the SEC’s complaint also formed the basis for criminal charges against Mr. Uboh in a parallel proceeding before this Court: United States v. Ubong Uboh, 21-CR-00146 (KAM) (E.D.N.Y.). Presently before the Court is Mr. Uboh’s pro se “Motion to Dismiss re: SEC’s Final Judgment with Prejudice.” (ECF No. 24, Def. Mem.) For the following reasons, Mr. Uboh’s motion is respectfully DENIED. Background I. Factual Background The facts and procedural history necessary to determine the instant motion, based on the record, the complaint, and consent is set forth as follows: The SEC’s complaint alleged, among other things, that Mr. Uboh violated Sections 17(a)(1), (2), and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) [15 U.S.C. §§77q(a)(1), (2), and (3)]; Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. §78j(b)]; and Rules 10b-5(a), (b), and (c) thereunder [17 C.F.R. §§240.10b-5(a), (b), and (c)]. (ECF No. 1, Compl. 5.) The complaint alleged that Mr. Uboh and Mr. Crockett made fraudulent representations from a Miami call room soliciting investors — many of whom were senior citizens — to purchase shares of microcap issuers. (Id.

1,3.) The complaint further alleged that Mr. Uboh and Mr. Crockett misappropriated another investor’s funds in connection with a private offering. (Id. 4.) Mr. Uboh and Mr. Crockett persuaded investors to purchase shares of microcap issuers while Garrett O’Rourke, who managed the call room, dumped millions of dollars’ worth of the microcap issuers’ shares. (Id.

Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Uboh

SEC Penalties, Sanctions Are Civil, Do Not Implicate Double Jeopardy Which Was Waived

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal