Securities and Exchange Commission v. Standford International Bank, Ltd. et al

Filing 1

SECOND AMENDED ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER. Signed by David C. Godbey, United States District Judge, July 19, 2010. (Attachments: # 1 Summary, # 2 Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief as to R. Allen Stanford, # 3 Agreed Preliminary Injunction as to Stanford International Bank, LTD, Stanford Group Company and Stanford Capital Management, LLC and Agreed Order Granting Other Equitable Relief, # 4 Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief as to James M. Davis, # 5 Agreed Preliminary Injunction as to Laura Pendergest-Holt and Agreed Order Granting Other Equitable Relief)(lw)

Download PDF
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Standford International Bank, Ltd. et al Doc. 1 Att. 4 Case 3:09-cv-0029&N Documont160 Filed03/12/2009 Page 1 of 12 ORIGINAL IN THE UNIIT,D STATESDISTnICT fURTEE NORTIIERN DISTRICT OF DALLAS I}IVISION SECURITIESAND EXCIIANGE COMMI$SION, Plflirtiff, STAII{f$RIT INTERT{ATIONAL BANI6 LTD., STATIfIORDGROUPCOMPAtrtY, STAIT{F\ORCAPTTALMANAGEMENT, LLC, IT R. ALLEN STANFOru),JAJ}IESM. DAVIS, snd IdURA PENDERGf,ST-HOLT Defsdants. and STA}TTORI}FINAITICIALGROUP,*[d 'fHE STANFORDFINANCIAL GROUPBLDG INC., Rrlief Defsldants. FRELIIIdINARY INJUNCTION AITDOTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF A S TO JAIT'E$IU,IIAYIS IhiB fi.attercamebeforemg the undasigrred UnitedStatee Dirtrct Judge, lzth day this of March,2009,on tlreapplioation Plsintiff Secrrrities Exc,hango of ud for Commitgion i8suencc of e proliruinary i4jmotion againet Ddfendent Jamee Dardsandan ordcr for othrrrequitable M. relief ageirrst hirn This Court has proviouslyi*ued e tonporary rcstrairing order ("TROJ, oder ftecaingarstb, orderrcquiringan Escormling, ordol rcquiringpreservatior doounentr, of ordtr aurhorizing cxpedited discovrry,audordcr ap'pointing receiver. Tha Courtextended tlrar TROon March2. 2fl)9, Based thematcrlalsbeforcthe Court,the Cow makee following findingr of frot on the and co,nclusiof,r law. of Cortifled sfucoFysf on file In my oflico on Clerk,FhS. Case3:0$w{0298-N 160 Document F i l ed03/12/2009 Page2 of 12 I. ard trclr,ein, was validly DefendantDavie receivsdectualrodce of the proceeaings servedwith a surnmoflserd cofiplaint. In addition, Davrswas validly rcrved md had aotual notice of lho TRO eartered this cagand the Much 2. 2009 txtcnsiof, of the IRO. Plaintiff in noticed Davis'r depo8itionwas to oc{ur on February23, 2009. 2. 3, Davis failed to appearfor thie depodtion. In licu of aprpcadng his dcpositiontcstirnony,Davis provided thc Conunission for with a doolarationin which invokal his privilego againateslf in+rimimtion rmderr Fifth the Amcfldm6lrtto the Unitcd StatesConstitution. 4" There arono fsctral iseuesin diryute with regmd to Defordmt Davie. Derpite having rccsived eavice and flotif* of the proc*dings, Davir hm not appoarcd othfl#ise ffi contested entry of a prclLniury injunction. Likewisg Davis haoEot filed or rcrved flny the pryers ir oppositionto thc cntry of the prcliminry injrnction, or ohallcngodthe sfs6t freezeor othe emergancy rclief grantcdin tlie TRO. 5. by OleCourt. 6. DefndantDavie hss failed to repatide assets obtainedfrom tlre activities allegcd Deftndant Df,vis ha3f;niledfo providc financralq accountinfomration asorderud bythcCunmi*ion. 7. Stanftrd Intfff,ationil Eanlq Ltd. (*SIB) purports to be a privato inlerrrational bank domiciled in SL Jobn'8,Artigu& West Indier. SIB claims to sewc 50,000clients in ovcr I00 countriee,with assete unde mrrugomerit of ap,proximntely billion. SIB sells putativc $8 ccrtificatesof dopo# (tro CD") to U.S. investorstfusugb SGC,its affiliared invtetnent advisr, SECv. SnnfordInwnutanal BanhIttl., et al. Pftlininary hju&tion rrd ftd6r Grsilih8 Otrd Reliof- JEffis M. DsviE 16O Case 3:09-cv-00298-N Document F i l ed03/122009 Page3 of 12 8. with Stalfffd Gmup Companyra Houston-baaed oorporrtion, is rrogi.stcred tho Commissionas a broker-dealerand irve$tnent ad-vitr. lt has29 ofHceslooarcdthmuglroutthe United Stahs. SGC'e princip*l bruineseconsistr ofeslEs ofSlB-issued tecuritiee,muketed tn gertificeter of depoeit. SGC ie a wholly ovrrud ubsiilierJ of Strnford Group Holding+, Irrc., which in fimr is ownodby DefendafltSbnford. 9. Sthford Cepital lvlanagomeflt, rwistrrcd invcstmc t sdvigrf,,took overr the a nranagemenof the SA$ p'mgran (formedy Mutual Fund Partners)from SGC iu early 2007. t SCIIImarkcts $A.S p'mgrur throughSGC. the 10. Daviq,a U.S,oitizar ard residffitof Bsldwyr! Mississippi, a director Defurdant is arrd chieffinancialolHcerof SFGandSIB, Davfu Tenncssce, maintdruoffims in Mcmphis, urd Tlrpelo, Mieeissippi, I 1. Daviscngaged fraudulent in conduct, includingmisapp'ro,priating invc$or firuds, end andmakingmatorial mimeprasentations omisio,ruconcaning amoug othrt thirrgs, SIB's certificafe dcpodit of progftfiLtherl8ture liquidity of SIB's as*{s, t}rcorfutenco rclated s[d of partytranssctions" purportcd loansfiom SIB to Sttrrford, purportcd crpital infuions into SIB, andthe SASprogam. 12, Davir'r assctr, proceeds iuoluding obtainod tbrough frau&rtcnt hiu nctivitiee, arr jeopordy dissipation loss, Absentanssset in immincnt of or freozc, Defcrdfft DaviscanrEmve fundsbcyondtheCourt'ejurisdiction with litle hopetbefthoycanberecoverod s latcrdete, et j"d rcndering fineJ perrt of dregorgeme,nt Commitdonmightobtdn moaningless. any the 13. Ttis uecessary guardtherecordrofDefqdant Davisrclatingto thedefendane to or anyof their recwitier,finmcial, or busiaess.dcelinge destruction alteratiorr. from or S E Cv. gtutftnl labrnatloral BaBh L, et dL Prelirrurry lnjumtion ild Ordnt Grutitrg Othtr R-elief- JarrEsM. Dlvis 160 Case 3:09+v-00298-N Document F i l ed03/12/2009 Page4 of 12 I 4, Defemdant Davis, directtyand indircctty, hssrrmdcussof lhe ftcfls dnd itBftumoffiIitiB of intusffiE corffflFrce,thc mailq or the facilitie of a nntionel*eonitits uchangc blov/ ard in the in conncctionwith thc ach, practiccg urd corrrset ofbulinets deecrihsd ploadingr. Commission'a 15. hrrcin tlut ittcludod Ths Commi*ion'r actiol arises our of corduct dscribcd of aotivitiesin theUdtod Statcsiflvolvirg frc saleof certain*ruritie+ includingthe CD eoldby SIB p'regraur andother dcfcndarrts a p'ropriatymuhul frmdv',nap and larown as 16. "SAS," In scllrngthe CD, the dofendmtsin this actioq inoMing Deftuda[t Daviq bade rcprcsearhtionconcaning umng otherthiilB$ G) the bedk'8 $sfoty ud Eecudt$ ad (ii) s cousisteflt,doubl+digit rotums on tho bark's invostmontportfolio. Theeereprneorrhfiofts were nutcrialty falaeand mhleadi$g. Instead"signifiomt portions of the banh's portfolio werc misapproprieted Stadord usedby him to edquirE privete equity md ltal estafe. In fact, d by "loans" to year-end2008, flre lsrgEstEegmentE ttrebank's porffolio were: (i) undocumcmted of Stanfod; (ii) private equity; and (iii) ove.r-valued cstate. real 17. $lB's financial fiatornrnts, which werc approvedby Dcfrndaat Davis, including its inves0nntincom, ar also fictio,nel. Ia calorleting SIB'B inveshtrntincomo, Doferdsnt Davis provided to SIB'$ intrffiBl accour sffs a prc{etennined retum ofl invsment for tho ba*'s pottfolio. Udng thir predctermined nr.rnber,SIB's accountants the rcverrse-cnginmrcd ttetffftnts to refltct invostmerf incomc thst SIB did not achrelly eflrn. barrk's fildanDial 18. Ia itr Decsmber2fl18 Monthly Report,whictr Davis appmvad,SIB told invffitora that the bank had receiveda cryital infiuion of $541 million on Novc,rrberr 2008. This 28, war tnate,riallyfrhe and misleading rcpresenfation EECv. SttutfordInfunational Bdnl| I&L, et al. Prclirninary Injunction trd Ordcf C'lhdng OftEr Relicf- Jarm M. Davis Case 3;0$cv-00298-N Document160 F i l ed03/1?/2009 Page5 of 12 19, on reforcucd abow wasma*etedbased Themuuralfirndvnepprrogram performanco datahistoricdl mateially falsemisladhg 20. Sedion art Theinveetffnts offcrcdurtl soldby theDefendant *tccrrrifies"rmder Act of smtion3(a)(10) theXxchange [15u.S'C.$ Act 2(1)of thoSccuritiec [r5 U.s.C"$ 77b1, ard 78cJSectiou , 2(36)of thcInveshne'rt Coqflny Aot [15 U.S.C.$ 80s.2(36)J, Scction 202(18ofths Advisrds [15U.S.C. 80b-?(18)J ) Act $ Zl, rmder Thir Courthasjurisdiotion and ie Section overthis action, vonue pr,oper, 2?(a)of thoSecuritieo [15 U.S.C.$ 77v(a)],Sectiat27 of theExchangc [15 U.S.C.$ Act Act 214 Sectioq of the InveeEnent 78aal, 43 Ast Compnry [15 U.S.C,fl 80a43J,md Scdtion of ths AdvistmAct [15U.S.C. 80b-14]. $ 22. jurisdictimorrr Dcfardent prrsonal sct on Thir Courthae Davisbasod thoactivities forthabove thoae and ddsilcdin Eflrcddscorsidssdin thismstb, Zl. Cr,rtofuof lhe tul$stionq ofbusitrcssconslitutingthe actq pr*ticEs, fid oourse8 allegedviolationsof lrrw occurcd within the NortlrernDisnict of Teras. W. DefendantDavis h* bcm scftEd with serviceof processurd rtcdved athral notice of thc pcrndenoy this mtion against of him, tho TRO, the ahrsiorr of ftc TRO, andtlre rlateand time of thc prcliminry idunctio'n hoaringin this maftEr. Srrrice of gmces wasvalidly effeotcd All pleadtrgsmd othrr pryers noceeatry tho mtry of this juilgment werepmpedy E6vcd otr for Defedant Davis. 25. Dofendilt Davis hasviolatedthis Coufi's ordcr rcquiring him to pmvidc informetionreguding hi6 ossetrard fte rrquinmeot that he rtpetsiateany afsu locdtd aho{d. Deffidant Davif hasalso defaultedotr the Conrnission'smotim for a peliminry injmctrou SEC Stdrrfort v. Inar'national Eanh Lrd., d d[. ftelimiffry InjurcuonEtrd Ofdcr C'raDtiDE RliEf- IarEE M. Dlvi8 Other 160 Cas63:0Scv-0029SN Document F i l ed03/1??009 Page6 of 12 ttlE rcliefby ffiling to ctmtedt arguf,eflb othr tho fid contimring a*et frccue for e odEf grflntif,g raiued tlreConodsdon by ud allegations 26, the ThoCcmmineion dernonstmted it is rete$seyto continuo injmcnve has fiar that to ofthrgaction srsur that areassets frceac, othcrrclicfdrring thEpeildEflcy and rElief,ds8t tniglt otruinagainst Dfetdant ttut to satic&,at lcsstin p4 snyfiral judgmerrt tbeConnrieeion Davis. 27. of TheCornmissiof, ttEonstdcdthsproFr drowing e qrrent violriion of the has fdcrclBsouritis rd a rislrth* thercviolsirns will rocur. Aomdin*ty, a pslimilffy lsws Defendaat ir$unc{ion aaed fu and frocae wuranted dtiecaee rrc agnlut ffiidxrJs, including Davis. FindingrofFactandCmclueitrFoflaw: Bascd thoftr,ogoing on I. tmployeeq m IS HEREBYORDEREDtllrt Defsrdatt Davis andhis agtf,t, scf,varte' attome)4rurd all otherperronsin gotivcconccrtor participation with him who receivoaEfiel noticeofthis Prcliminary Injunctionby prrsonalservics othsrwise rcrhainsdEfldetdoircd or ars from violatingSe+tion l?(a) of thc SccuriticrAct [15U,S.C.$ 77q(e)],dimctly or indirectly,in the offer or oaleof any eecurityby the ure of any meflrs or inetnrments transport8tion or of oommunicafioin intorstete n oommrce hy theuseof tlremails,by: or (1) (2) cnployingenydwios,rchqno,or arti-fice defiaurfi b or monoyor pftprty by moar5of ary untrucatf,tfircflrt mafcri8lfact ff obtaining of any omiesiouto Etstea $sftriel fEst trffessflry in ords to make tlrc steterhfltis) mrde, in the light of the circurnstaDoc$ underwhich they wfc frtder not ffieleading; ot SECv. [nnfod Int*adlnd l Banlt Ltd., Etal. Ptclimlnry l4iunction et*l Ordcr ftanting Oftsr Rchef- IsfiEs M. DnriE 160 Case3:0Scv{0298-N Document 7 Flled03/122009 Page of 12 (3) opfianeg would or engagingin any tranractioq practice'dr coutsoofbusineflev'rhic.h the operatcasa fiErrdor deceitr.ryon ptlrohflsr. tr. 8, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED tbat Defardant Davis and his agenb, B,rv&t tnplopes, EttdmeyB, and all other F ront in activc conert o'r puticipstifi with hift who rcceive actual notice of thie Prclimhary Injunctio,nby pertonal scrvice or othssrisc anelcsts8ifledatd enjoined from violating or aiding and abettingviolrtione ofSection 10(b)ofthe ExcbaryEAct or RuIe l0b* 5 [5 U.S.C. $ 78j(b) md 17 C.F.R. $ 240.10b-5J, directly m indiroctly, rn cormoctionwith thc purchaseor ealo of any sccurity, by fi.sking u8e of my meerr or in*umentnlity of intsslstE oommtrceror of thp mailq or of ety faoility of my nafimnl e$urities fschatrge: (1) . to use or employ any manipulative or deceptive device or confrivance in promulgatcdby the Commirdon; ootrtravcntio'n the rulee and regrrlations of Q) to employ any devicc, schmer ertifioc io defiaud; or to mako any urtrue statcmerrtof a material fact m ornit io stah e metdrisl fsct neces$ary otder to make the statrmt'rb mede,in tho light of the cirdmstances if, uder which flrcy wtre rnede" rnisleading; or not (3) (4) troengage ury aot,pradtico, cofiss ofbutinee8 rvhich opretEs would oprrato or in or as a freud or derEitupotrsnypcrsofi, Itr. lT IS IIEREBY ORDERED that Defendfit Dsvie and hie agmtn, Bcry& sr errrplo]es, 4ttrortre)Aand all othe perreonr aotive ooncert or participation with him who reccive actual , in noticc of this Prcliminary krjunction by pertonal serrriocor othtrwise af,ercshained and enjoitnd SECv. Sn4furdh*national fiaah,LxI, a ol. helininary Injunctionard Onhr GrmtingOtter Rclicf- Jarca M, Davis Case 3:09-cv-00298-N Document160 F i l edO 3l 12l 2O 09 PageI of 12 firom aiding and abetting violations of Soctims 206(l) rod 206(2) of thc AdvigersArt [15 U.S.C$$ 80b{0), (2), tlirectly or indirectlS by usc of the maile or any moansor irutsulflcf,tality of i ntr8latccsrltrlrcs, by: O) e,urployingany devico, schtfire, sr ttifice to defiald any clitnt u prstpactive clidrt;or (2) as engegit'g in any tansartio4 practioc! or course of bus rcss which oprrates e clienL fraudor rieceituponanycliffit or pruspctiv rv. employtcs, IT IS HEREBY OF.DERffi thflt Dsfoflddnt Devis attd his agEflts,8cfl'taflt6, attome),g,and all othor prrtons in actiw conctrt or partioipation with him who receive actual noticc of this Prcliminary Injriactiur by personalssvicc or othonriso ue herubyre*h*ined and enjoined from, dircctly or indirtctly making any prliuru$ or expnditure of fiuds btltmging b cr in tho posessioa custody,or colftol ofDcfendant Daviq or oflecting Euyealq gift, hypothe$tion or othrr dispositionof any assctbelongingb or in thr posscrsioq fl$ffiy, or ooottsl of Defendant to Davie,perdi4g a showitrgto this Cowt thet Dsftndart Davil hE$eufficiotfiItrdBor aEsEE $adsry all claims qieirg orrt of fte violations allegpdin mc Cffiriliemou'e Cour4laintor the po*ing of a bmd or surctyEufficitut to aesur pqymefltof uty suchclaim. v. IT IS HERBBY ORDEREI) that aU banks, savingsard loan aesocirtions,eaving ba&e, frust oompaniB8, seturities bfficrdeales, cofinoditis dtakrr, invtstnent cobpffiies, other financial or depodtory institutions, and invosur.flt companicst}lt hold onc or more accountsirr the nane, on behalf m for thc btnefit of Defsrdurt Davis $'ho rcceive actual noticc of this Prclimiury Injunction by personat s+rvico or othswiee aro hereby rwtnircd qdd eilljoifled, in InEnatloml BanNLtd., etal. SECtl Stanford 'Utmctidn Prelimiffry t Relief- Jrrrs M. Davis ald Ordff Gnnting O{hEr Case3:09-cv-00298-N Document160 F i l ed03/11Y2009 PageI of 12 rcgafd td any such acdoffit fro'nl engsgng in any transactionin seouritics(cxcept liqutdanug tteruactions recssssry to comply with a 566f order) or any disbur*rnent of fundg ot sccutitiet perrdingfuther ordtr of this Court. u. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED thet all other ind:ividrals, cotptrstions' petnErships' limitd liability companics,and othcrrartificial cntitiee who reccivo acbral flotics of thie PrcIiminry are Injunction by personalmrvics or othgr.vriec hueby restaincd md trnjoincd frono disbursing auy fuild+ sccwities, ot othd ptopef,ty obtained fiom Dofondsnt Davir vrithout adcqurtc con$ideration, vtr I1' IS ITERBBY ORDERED that Deftndant Davi6 is hercby rcquired to makc an intc'rim accounting Erdcr odth, within ten daysof tho issualce of this otden (I) dotailing all mo,niceand othcr bdefitewhich he received,directly or indirectly, as a result ofthc activitieo allegcd in the Complaint (inoludrng tho date on which the monies dr othe banefit was teceived and thc qams, addrcm, and telephonc nrrnber of tho prtrsonpeylrg the rhoDoyor providing the bemefiD;(2) listing all currd assob wherwer they may be looatcd ard by vehomcverthey are being held (including the name and addrossof the holder and the anount or value of thc holdings); and (3) Iisting all accountr with any financial or bmkerago institution mainfained in the namo o{ on of behalf of, or for tho benefit o{, DefendantDavis (including the namo and addroee the account holdor and ths arcount numberr)and the eftount hcld in oach affiount et f,y point dwing the p*iod ftom January1, 200Othrouglr thc dale of thc amounting. uIL SECI,. Stanlb li'tafiwionel Aenk, Ltd., et al. Preliminsry Injunction aud Orrler Oflrtiry Othr Relief - IsrIEs M. DaviE 160 Case3:09-cv-00?g&N Document 03/1?20og Pase10of 12 Filed finployEs' thet IT xSHEREBYORDERED Deffldmt D*us *rd hie rgu6 eef,vsnft, or afiomcydmd nll otherpcmoffiirl activFconort pffiioipiltion with th'|n, ircIuding 8ry benh , noticeof aEtuel irutitution,who rEooiv6s or broke-dealer, any financid Ordepdsitary soourities fir Preliminary ftrjunction by peamnal*rvice or othanviooare haoby rostainod and urjoincd cof,ctdling, or dispoaingo{, in fltry mantrst' any fmm dfftrcying; rilfloviflg, mutilating, alterring" and books ard recordsowned by, ot pertaining to, the finrncial transactio'ns asretsofDefdrdEnt or any entitiec undorhis control. D(. 1T IS HEREBY ORDERED that the corrunission iE Euthorizedto strr/6 procssor, alrd grve notice of theeeproceadingrurd the rclicf grffiied hersin to, Deftndant by U.S. lv{ail' e-mail' faosimile, ot any otht moanseuthorizd by the FederalRules of Civil Procedule' x. with the IT IS HEREBY ORDERED tlet nPditod discovety may teke pltce consistc'nt following: (l) upon oral efialnifftion ard may afly party may mticc ard oonduct de,poeitions requast ard ohtain pmduction of documflrts or otber things ftr inspetim and of copying ftom partiw prior to the expirntion of thirty dayt after sctrtr'ice a Eur$mo$s th6 Plaintifr Commissron'sComplaint upon De.ftndant; and (2) all panics shali comply with tbe provisions of Fed. R' Civ. P. 45 $garding imuauw snrt servico of trrbpoamr, unltm the pcrcon draignattd to provitlo to tEstitlloDyrff to pltduoc docrflieflt8 and tbitrgBsgreEd PIoviiIE the tFstfuDny o[ ot to producs tho docunents or thingEwithout tho irsuancc of a subpocma to do eo at a plece other thaa one at which tettimony or production canbo compclled; ,t. Inunetional Buh, l*L, et al. SEC Stanford Othrr RrlM- Jurce lrl. D[viE Pdinirnry InjtutctionandOrdcrGranting Case 3:09-cv{0298-N 160 Document F i l e d03/1212009 Page11 of 12 (3) a[y pasty fiey mtico snd cmduct d4ositions r.pon orel Exofiffirtion subject to minimum notice of scvffy-two (72) hour6; (4) all pmties Ehailprodudfor intpection arutcn'pyingall documfirts afld thif,gs thet rre rcqucstcd within soventy-two (7?) horrs of ervice of a written requeetfor thoscdodrmcintsand thingr; and (5) all parties shall sfir'c written rcrporuet to written htcffogatoriet within scventytwo (72) hourt rftr servioeofthe fufi rogntorieo. )il. IT IS IIEREBY ORDERBDth,atall puties frall eorvewdttetrrtsFo set t0 ary othor by parg/s requoetfor dieoovsy and the intorim aficomtingsto be prcvided by Deferndant address follows; as doliveryto thePlaintiff Corrmiesion AND UNIIED STATESSECTJRITIBS H(CIIANGE COMMISSION FortWorthRcgional Office Attantion: DavidReece BumasPlaza.Suite1900 801ChrryStreot, Unit #18 F o rtWo'rtr, TX 76102-6882 F a c s i mi l e(8n)n84927 : as md by dolivcry to ofrer particsat ruch addrcsr(or) may be dcsignatcd than in writing. by Suchdelivcry rhall bc madoby tho most expeditiou* includinge-$eil ffid meam availablo, facsimile. Xtr. IT IS HEREBY ORDERffi that DBfcddaf,t Davie Bhall ertrender hir passportand is barredfrom tavoling outsidothc United Stntoe utrtil ftflftcf, ord,rof this Cou XIII,$o lnta'.at nal BEnhLd., d aL Ptdlirhifffy lquDctim andOldcrGranting OthEr Bnlief lallcs M. Davis 160 Case3:09-cv-0029&N Document F i l e d03/1?/2009 Page12 of 1? employeos, IT IS HBREBY ORDERED that Defsrdnnt Davit and hia agcnts, 8ErYeffE, attomeys,deJlosltodes, bfl*e, strd all other penons iu adtive concrt or pilticiPstion with then who rcceivo nctufll notice of this PrelirninaryInjunction by perumel serviceor otherwite shall: (l) take such stepsaf art neceetaryto repalriareto the tenitory of the United Stetes all funds and assotsof investorsdescnted itr the Commitsion's Cmtplaint in tlus aro aotion rrrrhicJr held by him, or ryr unde hir direct tr ifldirect o$ttrol, jointly or eingln and dcposit suoh fimdr irto the Regitty of the United Statef Distriut Corrt, Northem Distict of Tends;afld (2) pmvide the Commission snd the Court a writtrn deecription of thc firnds Edd assets lpatriatd. $d XIV, DofendflntDsvis shall have twaty (20) days from thc drte of this Frotiminary Injtmction in which to answtr tho Commission'sFir6t Aflended Complaint. exncurnn a3,30cncrmiom tr,i/Z-ouno, csr . \ -JJ t DAVIDC, SECv. S'tanford ldcrnationl Bank, Ld, er ol. Prolimiury l4iurction aod Arder GftnUbC Odrff Rclicf - Jruee M. Davig

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?