United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Collins et al

Filing 81

MOTION by Plaintiff United States Securities and Exchange Commission for judgment as to Defendant James R. Collins (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Collins Bifurcated Consent, # 2 Exhibit B - Proposed Judgment as to Defendant James R. Collins)(Martin, Christopher)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JAMES R. COLLINS AND
ROBERT F. DIMEO,

Case No.: 1:21-cv-05040
Honorable LaShonda A. Hunt

Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF
JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT JAMES R. COLLINS
Plaintiff, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) respectfully moves for the
entry of judgement against Defendant James R. Collins (“Defendant Collins”). In support of this
unopposed motion, the SEC states as follows:
1.

Defendant Collins has pleaded guilty to criminal conduct relating to certain

matters alleged in the complaint in this action. Specifically, in United States v. Collins et al., 2cr-232 (N.D. IL, Valderrama, F.), on November 21, 2023, Defendant Collins pleaded guilty to
one count of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1341 in a criminal case pending before Judge Valderrama and
solely for purposes of computing his sentence only, stipulated to committing an additional
offense of bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344. See United States v. Collins et al. 20-cr232, Dkt. 180 (N.D. Ill, November 21, 2023). In connection with that plea, Defendant Collins
admitted the facts set forth in his Plea Agreement that is appended to his Consent, which is
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2.

The SEC’s staff and Defendant Collins have reached a bifurcated settlement

resolving all non-monetary relief in this matter and have setup a framework, if these parties

cannot resolve the monetary claims, for the Court to resolve the SEC’s monetary claims against
Defendant Collins.
3.

Defendant Collins has consented to the entry of judgment against him. See

Exhibit A - Executed Copy of the Consent.
4.

Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a proposed judgement as to Defendant Collins.

5.

As to the non-monetary relief, Defendant Collins, has agreed to, among other

things, permanent injunctions to not violate certain provisions of the federal securities laws and
from serving as an officer or director of a public company. Id., ¶¶ I-III.
6.

As to the monetary relief, Defendant Collins has agreed that, among other things,

upon the SEC’s Motion the Court shall determine whether it is appropriate to order (if so, the
amounts) disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, prejudgment interest, and/or a civil penalty pursuant
to Section 20(d) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(d)] and Section 21(d)(3) of the Exchange
Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(3)]. Id., ¶ IV.
7.

This motion is unopposed since Defendant Collins has consented to all of the

relief requested by the SEC.
8.

Lastly, the SEC believes the current stay in this matter should remain in place

until both defendants have been sentenced in their respective criminal cases as. See ECF 54.
Defendant Collins was very recently sentenced in the above referenced criminal proceeding. The
other defendant in this matter, Defendant Robert F. DiMeo (who also pleaded guilty to related
criminal conduct and the Court previously entered a bifurcated judgment against (see ECF 33)),
has not yet been criminally sentenced. Until Defendant DiMeo is sentenced, we believe that a
continued stay is appropriate (subject to the parties continuing to provide status updates to the

-2-

Court). 1 After Defendant DiMeo is sentenced, the SEC plans on moving the Court to lift the
stay, confer with counsel for both Defendants whether a resolution (subject to Commission
approval) can be reached on the remaining monetary remedies, and, if necessary, propose a
schedule for the monetary remedies briefing. The SEC has conferred with counsel for
Defendants Collins and DiMeo, and they do not oppose a continuation of the stay.
WHEREFORE, the SEC respectfully moves for the entry of judgment (Exhibit B)
against Defendant Collins.
Respectfully submitted this 10th day of March 2025.
By:

/s/ Christopher E. Martin
Christopher E. Martin
David A. Nasse (pro hac vice)
Jonathan Polish
U.S. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION
100 F Street N.E.
Washington, DC 20549
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for the Plaintiff

1

See also ECF 35.

-3-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that on March 10, 2025, he filed the foregoing
document with the district court’s CM/ECF system, which will automatically cause a copy of the
document to be sent to all counsel of record.
/s/ Christopher E. Martin

-4-