Securities and Exchange Commission v. AmeraTex Energy, Inc. et al

Filing 30

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE for 29 Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the SEC's Unopposed Motion to Enter Agreed Partial Judgment against Defendant Fort (Dkt. #28), as set forth in the Consent (Dkt. #28-1) and the proposed final judgment (Dkt. #28-2), is GRANTED. Signed by District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III on 8/28/2018. (daj, )

United States District Court
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
AMERATEX ENERGY, INC., LEWIS
OIL CORPORATION, LEWIS OIL
COMPANY, THOMAS A. LEWIS,
WILLIAM R. FORT, DAMON L. FOX,
and BRIAN W. BUL,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:18-CV-129

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this
matter having been heretofore referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On May
22, 2018, the report of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. #29) was entered containing proposed findings of
fact and recommendations that Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “SEC”)
Unopposed Motion to Enter Agreed Partial Final Judgment against Defendant William R. Fort
(“Fort”) (the “Motion”) (Dkt. #28) be granted. See id.
Having received the report of the United States Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto
having been timely filed, the Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the
Magistrate Judge are correct and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s report as the findings and conclusions
of the Court.
The SEC filed suit on February 27, 2018 (Dkt. #1), alleging violations of the federal securities
laws against Defendant Fort. The SEC alleges, among other things, that Defendant Fort made material
misrepresentations and omissions and engaged in a continuous scheme to misappropriate investor

monies to enrich themselves. See generally Dkt. #1. The complaint further alleges that Defendant
Fort violated the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws, specifically Section 17(a) of the
Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act") and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Id. at ¶¶ 3-4.
The SEC has reached a settlement with Defendant Fort (see Dkt. #28), and Defendant Fort
has executed a consent (the “Consent”) (Dkt. #28-1) representing that he: (1) was served with a
summons and the complaint in this action; (2) enters a general appearance; (3) admits this Court’s
jurisdiction over him and the subject matter of this action; and (4) consents to the entry of final
judgment without admitting or denying the allegations in the complaint (except as to jurisdiction and
as otherwise provided in paragraph 12 of the Consent). See id. The Consent also represents that
Defendant Fort consents to the entry of final judgment as set forth in the Consent (Dkt. #28-1) and in
the proposed final judgment (Dkt. #28-2) submitted with the Motion. As set forth in the Motion (Dkt.
#28) and its accompanying attachments, the SEC moves, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b),
for entry of final judgment and permanent injunctions against Defendant Fort. Among other things,
the proposed final judgment seeks the issuance of permanent injunctions against the Defendant Fort.
See id.
.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the SEC’s
Unopposed Motion to Enter Agreed Partial Judgment against Defendant Fort (Dkt. #28), as set forth
in the Consent (Dkt. #28-1) and the proposed final judgment (Dkt. #28-2), is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
SIGNED this 28th day of August, 2018.

___________________________________
AMOS L. MAZZANT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2