Securities and Commodities Fraud (2024)

The MIMF Unit specializes in the investigation and prosecution of cases involving publicly traded securities. These cases include accounting fraud at publicly traded companies, insider trading, false statements, market manipulation, and other schemes. The Unit also has devoted particular attention to cases involving officers of publicly traded companies who deceived investors in connection with the COVID-19 crisis. For example, prosecutors in the Unit secured the conviction of the president of a Silicon Valley-based medical technology company for participating in a scheme to mislead investors, commit health care fraud, and pay illegal kickbacks in connection with the submission of over $77 million in fraudulent claims for COVID-19 and allergy testing.

The Unit also is the national leader in prosecuting fraud and manipulation in the U.S. commodities markets, including spoofing, insider trading, and benchmark price manipulation.

Prosecutors in the Unit use data analysis and traditional law enforcement techniques to identify and prosecute complex fraud, manipulation, spoofing, and insider trading cases involving commodities and securities markets. Prosecutors have developed unique algorithms to comb market-wide trade data for patterns indicative of manipulative trading practices, and frequently work in parallel with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

In connection with an ongoing market manipulation probe, the Fraud Section has convicted 12 commodities and securities traders at global financial institutions, including a Managing Director and six Executive Directors who were convicted after jury trials. Since 2019, as part of the same probe, the Fraud Section entered into landmark corporate resolutions relating to violations of the commodities and securities laws—including with JPMorgan Chase, The Bank of Nova Scotia, Merrill Lynch Commodities, Deutsche Bank AG, Tower Research Capital, Propex Derivatives, and NatWest Markets—with a combined total monetary amount of over $1.1 billion.

Separately, the Unit convicted a former oil trader in connection with a scheme to manipulate fuel oil prices in the Port of Los Angeles, one of the nation’s busiest commercial ports. In a related case, the trader’s employer, Glencore Ltd.—one of the world’s largest commodities mining and trading companies—pleaded guilty to a conspiracy to manipulate benchmark prices and agreed to pay $485 million in criminal fines and forfeiture.

NatWest

U.S. v. NatWest Markets Plc: Docket No. 3:21-cr-187-OAW

Roadrunner Transportation Systems, Inc.

U.S. v. Peter Armbruster: Docket No. 2:18-cr-00130-LA-NJ-3

Decision Diagnostics

U.S. v. Keith Berman: Docket No. 1:20-cr-278

Arrayit

U.S. v. Mark Schena: Docket No. 5:20-CR-00425

Celadon

U.S. v. Celadon Group Inc.: Docket No. 1:19-cr-0141-JRS-DML

Mitchell Stein

U.S. v Mitchell Stein : Court Docket Number: 9:11-cr-80205

Sea World

U.S. v. Paul Powers : Docket No. 6:19-cr-00057-CEM-LRH-1

Bankrate Inc.

U.S. v. Hyunjin Lerner: Docket No. 1:17-cr-20235-KMM-1

U.S. v. Edward J. DiMaria: Docket No. 1:17-CR-20898- MGC-1

U.S. v. Bankrate Inc.: Docket No. N\A

ArthroCare

U.S. v. ArthroCare: Docket No. 1:14-cr-00015-SS-1

U.S. v. Michael Baker: Docket No. 1:13-cr-00346-SS-1

U.S. v. Michael Gluk: Docket No. 1:13-cr-00346-SS-2

U.S. v. John Raffle: Docket No. 1-:12-CR-00314-SS-1

U.S. v. David Applegate: Docket No. 1:12-CR-00314-SS-2

Poseidon Concepts

U.S. v. Joseph Kostelecky: Docket No. 1:17-cr-00015-DLH-1

TierOne

U.S. v. Don A. Langford: Docket No. 4:14-cr-03103-JMG-CRZ-1

U.S. v. Gilbert Lundstrom: Docket No. 4:14-cr-03136-JMG-CRZ-1

U.S. v. James Laphen: Docket No. 4:14-cr-03133-JMG-CRZ-1

Deutsche Bank AG

U.S. v. James Vorley and Cedric Chanu: Docket No. 1:18-cr-00035

U.S. v. David Liew: Docket No. 1:17-cr-00001-1

U.S. v. Deutsche Bank AG: Docket No. 20-00584

Merrill Lynch Commodities

U.S. v. Merrill Lynch Commodities

U.S. v. Edward Bases: Docket No. 1:18-cr-00048-1

The Bank of Nova Scotia

U.S. v. Corey Flaum : Docket No. 1:2019-CR-00338-BMC

U.S. v. The Bank of Nova Scotia: Docket No. 20-707 (MAS)

JPMorgan Chase

U.S. v. John Edmonds : Docket No. 3:18-cr-00239-RNC-1

U.S. v. Christian Trunz : Docket No. 1:2019-CR-00375-SJ

U.S. v. Gregg Smith, Michael Nowak, Christopher Jordan, and Jeffrey Ruffo: Docket No. 19-CR-669

U.S. v. JPMorgan Chase: Docket No. 3:20-cr-00175 - RNC

Tower Research Capital LLC

U.S. v. Tower Research Capital LLC: Docket No. 4:19-cr-00819

U.S. v. Yuchun “Bruce” Mao: Docket No. 4:18-cr-00606-1

U.S. v. Kamaldeep Gandhi: Docket No. 4:18-cr-00609-1

U.S. v. Krishna Mohan: Docket No. 4:18-cr-00610-1

Propex Derivatives

U.S. v. Propex Derivatives Pty Ltd.: Docket No. 1:20-cr-00039-1

U.S. v. Jiongsheng "Jim" Zhao: Docket No. 1:18-cr-00024-1

Navinder Singh Sarao

U.S. v. Navinder Singh Sarao: Docket No. 1:15-CR-00075-1

Insider Trading

U.S. v. John Ed James: Docket No. 4:20-cr-695

Securities and Commodities Fraud (2024)

FAQs

Is securities fraud hard to prove? ›

Securities fraud is an especially difficult crime to catch and prosecute. It is difficult for any observer to really judge whether a significant loss was due to natural market fluctuations or due to being given bad or misleading information.

How long do you go to jail for securities fraud? ›

Incarceration. A conviction for securities fraud can also result in a prison sentence. Any conviction for a federal securities fraud crime can result in a five-year federal prison sentence per offense. Certain acts carry up to 20 years of federal prison time.

What is the sentencing guidelines for commodities fraud? ›

Securities and commodities fraud is a serious crime under federal law, punishable by a maximum imprisonment of 25 years, plus a fine. 18 U.S.C. § 1349 confirms that an attempt or conspiracy to commit a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1348 will be punished in the same manner as a violation of Section 1348 itself.

What are the penalties for securities fraud? ›

Under federal law, the crime of Securities Fraud is a Class C felony, punishable by up to twenty years in prison, three years of supervised release, and $5 million in fines.

What evidence is used to prove fraud? ›

Texts or e-mails from the person that reveal they knew the statement to be false are usually the most effective type of proof, but you can also obtain testimony from third parties. Without such clear proof of the speaker's actual knowledge, your fraud claim will run into a brick wall.

How do you prove intent to deceive? ›

Fraudulent intent is shown if a representation is made with reckless indifference to its truth or falsity.” Intent can be reasoned from statements, conduct, victim testimony, and complaint letters, all of which can help demonstrate that the perpetrator knew that victims were being misled.

Does the SEC investigate securities fraud? ›

Each year, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) brings hundreds of civil and administrative enforcement actions against individuals and companies for violations of the nation's federal securities laws. Within the SEC, the Division of Enforcement conducts investigations.

Is there a statute of limitations on securities fraud? ›

Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Section 10(b) there are two distinct timeframes for filing claims related to securities fraud: a two (2) year statute of limitations and a five (5) year statute of repose.

Can the SEC send you to jail? ›

It can conduct investigations of suspected illegal activity and can also bring civil actions against those who have violated its regulations. However, even though it can work with the Justice Department or other law enforcement officials on criminal cases, it cannot directly send a perpetrator to jail.

What are examples commodities fraud? ›

One example is a scientist who discovers a blight that will affect a season's crop of corn. If, in lieu of or ahead of disclosing this crucial information they make a financial decision about their investments in the corn commodities market, they may be guilty of front-running.

How much money is considered a federal offense? ›

When the person commits an act of embezzlement of federal funds, the crime value is based on the $1,000 mark. This determines whether a felony or misdemeanor is given for the offense. Only felonies can be fined up to $250,000, and misdemeanors receive smaller amounts.

How many years is a federal life sentence? ›

There are two types of life sentences - a life sentence and a life sentence without parole. A life sentence equates to any sentence that carries a minimum of 25 years, after which time the individual may or may not be granted parole. A life sentence without parole is exactly that.

What is the largest securities fraud settlements? ›

About Robbins Geller

And in those three years alone, Robbins Geller recovered nearly $5.3 billion for investors, more than double the amount recovered by any other plaintiffs' firm. The Firm secured the largest-ever securities fraud class action settlement — $7.2 billion — in In re Enron Corp. Securities Litigation.

What are the defenses to securities fraud? ›

In defending against a securities fraud pleading, you should determine whether there are any allegations of motive and opportunity, such as insider trading or the issuance of secondary stock. Pointing out a lack of motive and opportunity allegations is relevant to a court's scienter analysis, although not dispositive.

How long can you go to jail for invest? ›

At the federal level, securities law violations are punishable by up to 20 years in prison and a $5 million fine. The range of punishment for securities fraud is determined based upon the amount of money manipulated in the alleged fraudulent scheme.

How do you prove security fraud? ›

Securities Fraud Evidence: Trading Records

In addition to financial statements, trading records play a crucial role in establishing a securities fraud claim. These records include transaction logs and account statements, which are vital in tracking the movement of securities and identifying suspicious activities.

What is the most difficult type of misstatement to detect fraud? ›

Answer: b. The non-recording of transactions. For auditors, the most difficult type of misstatement to detect fraud is when the transactions are not recorded. This is difficult because the auditor has no basis and reference on tracing and vouching of documents.

Does fraud have to be proven? ›

In civil proceedings the burden of proof is on the victim to prove “on the balance of probabilities” that the defendant committed the alleged fraud. In criminal proceedings the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove “beyond reasonable doubt” that the defendant committed the alleged fraud. 3.

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Golda Nolan II

Last Updated:

Views: 6351

Rating: 4.8 / 5 (58 voted)

Reviews: 81% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Golda Nolan II

Birthday: 1998-05-14

Address: Suite 369 9754 Roberts Pines, West Benitaburgh, NM 69180-7958

Phone: +522993866487

Job: Sales Executive

Hobby: Worldbuilding, Shopping, Quilting, Cooking, Homebrewing, Leather crafting, Pet

Introduction: My name is Golda Nolan II, I am a thoughtful, clever, cute, jolly, brave, powerful, splendid person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.