In the most recent filing, Kenneth Bell, upon consulting with the SEC, has established the threshold for qualification of a “Net Winner” as winning $1,000 or more. I bet that throws a wrench into the spinning wheels of the HYIP world. For far too long, purveyors and promoters of these schemes have gotten away with things, but not any longer it would appear. If this Motion is approved by Senior District Judge Mullen it could spell DOOM for HYIP’s, both now and in the future.
At this time, the primary focus is on the money, but it will soon shift towards criminal/civil culpability and possibly more charges against the knowing and willing participants in this Auction/Bids Ponzi Scam.
As the old poker saying goes, “Read ’em and weep”.
On Friday, June 27th, Kenneth Bell filed “Receiver’s Motion to Approve Settlement Agreements and Leave to Settle Certain Claims Against Net Winners”. Along with the Motion, there are 2 separate exhibits; the first a sample Settlement Agreement and the second is a listing of 136 initial Settlements made, the amount of the settlement and a payment schedule; the Receivership is cooperating with “net winners” and allowing them to pay things out.
Here’s part of the proposed agreement:
I have added these new filings onto the Files Website.
Jordan D. Maglich Friday, June 28, 2013 at 8:29AM
Two years ago, Ponzitracker was launched with a simple goal in mind – to serve as a comprehensive resource on the proliferation of Ponzi schemes. This has included regular reporting on schemes across the world, as well as other educational information regardless of whether the audience was a victim, litigant, or lawyer. (This audience apparently also included perpetrators, as one recent decision from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals showed.) This information has remained free of charge, and free of advertisements or other distractions. Since its launch, Ponzitracker has strived to stay at the forefront of Ponzi litigation, and in doing so has been recognized as a Top 25 Business Blog by Lexis Nexis and is routinely ranked as one of the top blogs by Avvo. Today, it will go one step further by introducing Briefcache.
With a steadily-growing library of 500+ articles, the thought recently occurred as to how Ponzitracker could function as a resource not only for the casual reader, but for practitioners in the rapidly growing niche industry of Ponzi litigation. As hundreds of Ponzi schemes have been uncovered in the past several years, a strengthening legal jurisprudence is emerging. However, much of this information is not easily available.
Today, Ponzitracker will launch Briefcache, which is the beginning of efforts to make the burgeoning jurisprudence of Ponzi litigation available to all. Briefcache features thousands of legal documents categorized by topic that have been filed, litigated, and decided in Ponzi scheme receivership and bankruptcy cases. From the sale of airplanes to status reports to recovering land to returning funds to victims, these documents are all now available after months of preparation and indexing.
Best of all, Briefcache will be free of charge. While it will remain a work in progress, it is my sincere hope that it may function as a valuable and worthwhile resource to whatever audience may decide to utilize it.
A link to Briefcache is here.
It appears that Leaming’s attempt to stay the Forfeiture of his “property” has not met with favor. Here’s what Judge Leighton had to say:
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STAY FORFEITURE
Defendant “directs” the Court to stay forfeiture of his property pending appeal (because he is quite certain that there are “fundamental jurisdictional issues” concerning whether a federal court has the authority to hear federal criminal trials). The property at issue is Defendants’ firearms and regalia related to his sovereign citizen club, including pretend law enforcement badges. Defendant, already a felon before this conviction, offers no reason to stay forfeiture.
Well, that answers that. I really like Judge Leighton, he doesn’t mince words.
As some may recall, around the end of April a ProSun affiliate, James Paul Schilling, filed a Pro Se Motion to Release $57, 300 that he had Wire transferred to Profitable Sunrise. Today, he received an answer from Judge Thrash, as follows:
This is an SEC enforcement action. It is before the Court on the pro se Motion to Unfreeze and Release Cash Wire Transfers [Doc. 13] of James Paul Schilling. This attempt to intervene is prohibited by 15 U. S. C. § 78u(g). The Motion to
Unfreeze and Release Cash Wire Transfers [Doc. 13] is DENIED.
SO ORDERED, this 19 day of June, 2013.
The second installment of Kevin Thompson’s atricle regarding the FTC’s guidelines for online marketing has arrived.
This article was written by +Kevin Thompson in collaboration with our stellar summer associate, Jake Perry.
In the last article, FTC’s Disclosure Guidelines for Online Marketing: How to get it right (Part 1), we walked through the Federal Trade Commission’s recently published .com Disclosure Guidelines (fully included below). In this installment, we’re going to walk through five hypothetical examples of common marketing claims made in the MLM industry. The goal of this post is to provide you with practical, easy-to-understand tips on how to make proper claims.
The format is simple: I’m going to give you common fact patterns of how claims are made in the MLM industry. Then I’ll show you what most distributors would WANT to do as far as making disclosures. Then I’ll show what they SHOULD do, as per the .com Disclosure Guidelines. These guidelines apply whether the company is an MLM startup or a well-established company.
Read the rest of the article here..