Securities and Exchange Commission v. Brown et al

Filing 19

ORDER re: 14 Proposed Judgment filed by Securities and Exchange Commission, 15 Proposed Judgment filed by Securities and Exchange Commission, 13 Proposed Judgment filed by Securities and Exchange Commission, 12 Proposed Judgment , filed by Securities and Exchange Commission, 10 Letter, filed by Securities and Exchange Commission, Joshua Jeppesen. The Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") has submitted executed consents and proposed judgments for defe ndants Joshua Jeppesen, Ryan Maasen, Laura Mascola, and Michael Nobel. The submitted consents each state that the individual defendants have consented to the entry of the "Judgment in the form attached hereto," however no judgments were att ached to the consents and the proposed judgments were filed separately on ECF. ECF Nos. 10, 12, 13, 14, 15. The SEC is instructed to refile the consents with the respective proposed judgments attached. Further, the SEC has requested permission to fil e the consent and proposed judgment for defendant Jeppesen under seal, because both the consent and proposed judgment identify a public blockchain address with significant assets. The Court authorizes the filing of an unredacted copy of the Jeppesen consent and proposed judgment under seal, with access restricted to the selected party viewing level, to be accompanied with a redacted copy of the consent and proposed judgment on the public docket. The Clerk is directed to restrict access to ECF No s. 10 and 12 to the selected party viewing level. Finally, the SEC should also explain why each of the proposed judgments, including the penalty and disgorgement amounts provided therein, are "fair and reasonable" and that the "public interest would not be disserved" by the included injunctive relief. SEC v. Citigroup Glob. Markets, Inc., 752 F.3d 285, 294 (2d Cir. 2014). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 6/2/2021) (kv)