Securities and Exchange Commission v. Aletheia Research and Management Inc et al, No. 2:2012cv10692 - Document 32 (C.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: JUDGMENT AS TO DEFENDANT PETER J. EICHLER, JR. by Judge John F. Walter. IT IT HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendant and Defendant's agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with hi m who receive actual notice of this Final 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"), 1 5 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 sal e of any security: (a) to employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud; (b) to make any untrue statement of material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statement 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. (See document for further details), in favor of Securities and Exchange Commission against Aletheia Research and Management Inc (bp)

Download PDF

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Aletheia Research and Management Inc et al 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Doc. 32 JOHN B. BULGOZDY, Cal. Bar No. 219897 Email: bulgozdyj@sec.gov GARY Y. LEUNG, L.R. 83-2.4.1 leave to practice granted Email: leungg@sec.gov JANET E. MOSER, Cal. Bar No. 199171 Email: moserj@sec.gov Attorneys for Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission Michele Wein Layne, Regional Director Lorraine B. Echavarria, Associate Regional Director John W. Berry, Regional Trial Counsel 5670 Wilshire Boulevard, 11th Floor Los Angeles, California 90036 Telephone: (323) 965-3998 Facsimile: (323) 965-3908 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 13 14 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 15 Plaintiff, 16 17 18 19 vs. Case No. CV12-10692 JFW (RZx) JUDGMENT AS TO DEFENDANT PETER J. EICHLER, JR. ALETHEIA RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT, INC., and PETER J. EICHLER, JR., Defendants. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dockets.Justia.com 1 The Securities and Exchange Commission having filed a Complaint and 2 Defendant Peter J. Eichler, Jr. having entered a general appearance; consented to 3 the Court’s jurisdiction over Defendant and the subject matter of this action; 4 consented to entry of this Final Judgment without admitting or denying the 5 allegations of the Complaint (except as to jurisdiction); waived findings of fact and 6 conclusions of law; and waived any right to appeal from this Final Judgment: I. 7 8 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendant 9 and Defendant’s agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons in active 10 concert or participation with him who receive actual notice of this Final Judgment 11 by personal service or otherwise are permanently restrained and enjoined from 12 violating, directly or indirectly, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 13 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated 14 thereunder, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5, by using any means or instrumentality of 15 interstate commerce, or of the mails, or of any facility of any national securities 16 exchange, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security: 17 (a) to employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud; 18 (b) to make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a 19 material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light 20 of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; or 21 22 23 24 (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 HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendant 25 and Defendant’s agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons in active 26 concert or participation with him who receive actual notice of this Final Judgment 27 by personal service or otherwise are permanently restrained and enjoined from 28 1 1 violating, directly or indirectly, Sections 206(1), 206(2) and 206(4) of the 2 Investment Advisers Act (“Advisers Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 80b-6(1), (2) and (4), and 3 Rule 206(4)-8(a) promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. § 275.206(4)-8(a), by using 4 the mails or any means of instrumentality of interstate commerce: 5 (a) prospective client; 6 7 (b) 10 11 12 to engage in any transaction, practice, or course of business which operates as a fraud or deceit upon any client or prospective client; or 8 9 to employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud any client or (c) to engage in any act, practice, or course of business which is fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative. III. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED 13 that Defendant shall pay disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, prejudgment interest 14 thereon, and a civil penalty pursuant to Section 21(d)(3) of the Exchange Act, 15 15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(3), and Section 209(e) of the Advisers Act, 15 U.S.C. § 80b-9(e). 16 The Court shall determine the amounts of the disgorgement and civil penalty upon 17 motion of the Commission. Prejudgment interest shall be calculated from 18 December 14, 2012, based on the rate of interest used by the Internal Revenue 19 Service for the underpayment of federal income tax as set forth in 26 U.S.C. § 20 6621(a)(2). In connection with the Commission’s motion for disgorgement and/or 21 civil penalties, and at any hearing held on such a motion: (a) Defendant will be 22 precluded from arguing that it did not violate the federal securities laws as alleged 23 in the Complaint; (b) Defendant may not challenge the validity of the Consent or 24 this Final Judgment; (c) solely for the purposes of such motion, the allegations of 25 the Complaint shall be accepted as and deemed true by the Court (except for the 26 three dollar figures alleged in the final sentence of Paragraph 3, the percentage 27 return figures alleged in the tables contained in Paragraphs 31 and 32, the dollar 28 2 1 and percentage figures alleged in the last sentence of Paragraph 38, and the three 2 dollar figures alleged in Paragraph 39); and (d) the Court may determine the issues 3 raised in the motion on the basis of affidavits, declarations, excerpts of sworn 4 deposition or investigative testimony, and documentary evidence, without regard to 5 the standards for summary judgment contained in Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules 6 of Civil Procedure. In connection with the Commission’s motion for disgorgement 7 and/or civil penalties, the parties may take discovery, including discovery from 8 appropriate non-parties. 9 IV. 10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that this 11 Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter for the purposes of enforcing the terms 12 of this Final Judgment. V. 13 14 There being no just reason for delay, pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal 15 Rules of Civil Procedure, the Clerk is ordered to enter this Final Judgment 16 forthwith and without further notice. 17 18 Dated: November 7, 2013 ______________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE JOHN F. WALTER 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.