2000 ANNUAL REPORT

Division of Enforcement

The Division of Enforcement (Division) investigates and prosecutes alleged violations of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA or Act) and Commission regulations. The Division takes enforcement action against individuals and firms registered with the Commission, those who are engaged in commodity futures and option trading on designated domestic exchanges, and those who improperly market futures and option contracts.

The Work of the Division of Enforcement

The Division bases investigations on information it develops independently, as well as information referred by other Commission divisions; industry self-regulatory organizations; State, Federal, and international authorities; and members of the public. At the conclusion of an investigation, the Division may recommend that the Commission initiate administrative proceedings or seek injunctive and ancillary relief on behalf of the Commission in Federal court. Administrative sanctions may include orders suspending, denying, revoking, or restricting registration and exchange trading privileges and imposing civil monetary penalties, cease and desist orders, and orders of restitution. The Commission also may obtain temporary restraining orders and preliminary and permanent injunctions in Federal court to halt ongoing violations, as well as civil monetary penalties. Other relief may include appointment of a receiver, the freezing of assets, restitution to customers, and disgorgement of unlawfully acquired benefits. The CEA also provides that the Commission may obtain certain temporary relief on an ex parte basis (that is, without notice to the other party), including restraining orders preserving books and records, freezing assets, and appointing a receiver. When those enjoined violate court orders, the Division may seek to have the offenders held in contempt.

When the Division obtains evidence that criminal violations of the CEA have occurred, it may refer the matter to the Department of Justice for prosecution. Criminal activity involving commodity-related instruments can result in prosecution for criminal violations of the CEA and for violations of other Federal criminal statutes, including mail fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy. The Division provides expert help and technical assistance with case development and trials to U.S. Attorneys' Offices, other Federal and State law enforcement agencies, and international authorities. The Commission and individual states may join as co-plaintiffs in civil injunctive actions brought to enforce the CEA.

Enforcement Statistical Summary: Fiscal Year 2000

During FY 2000, the Commission instituted 12 civil injunctive actions and 41 administrative proceedings, which included 6 statutory disqualification actions. The following sanctions became final during FY 2000. These include sanctions assessed in settled matters and unappealed decisions of the Commission, U.S. district courts, or U.S. courts of appeals. The results obtained by the Division in civil injunctive proceedings in FY 2000 included: ex parte restraining orders against 33 defendants; preliminary injunctions against 56 defendants; permanent injunctions against 70 defendants; the appointment of 3 equity receivers; the assessment of over $115 million in civil monetary penalties against a total of 18 defendants; and approximately $134 million in restitution and disgorgement ordered against a total of 61 defendants. The results obtained by the Division in administrative proceedings included: cease and desist orders against 73 respondents; trading prohibitions against 25 respondents; the imposition of registration suspensions, denials, or revocations against 25 respondents; the assessment of approximately $7.5 million in civil monetary penalties against 42 respondents; and approximately $22 million in restitution ordered against eight respondents.

Enforcement Highlights: Fiscal Year 2000

Beyond the numbers, much of the Commission's work in fighting fraud this year combined the remedial and deterrent effects of its enforcement actions with a simultaneous public education initiative that included the issuance of new Consumer Advisories warning potential customers of the perils of certain commodity-related activities. The Commission also prosecuted related injunctive and administrative enforcement proceedings to combat a scheme involving fraudulent trade allocation on the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT). The significant developments in FY 2000 are as follows:

Internet Project. In FY 2000, the Commission demonstrated its continuing commitment to respond when new methods, such as the Internet, are used as the means to cheat or defraud the public. These new methods enable malefactors to solicit business fraudulently from millions of people quickly and cheaply. To combat this threat, the Commission's Enforcement program employed: 1) coordinated filings of enforcement actions to send an enhanced message to both wrongdoers and the public; 2) enhanced consumer education in the publication of a new Consumer Advisory warning the public about potentially deceptive websites; 3) domestic and international cooperative surveillance, or "Internet Surfs;" and 4) training of international enforcement agencies in the investigation and litigation of Internet-related fraud actions.

On May 1, 2000, the Commission announced the initial results of a coordinated enforcement initiative with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) aimed at cleaning up Internet websites. As part of this Internet Project, the Commission filed and simultaneously settled 10 administrative enforcement actions involving targeted websites that fraudulently promoted commodity trading systems and advisory services to the general public. On September 6, 2000, the Commission filed and simultaneously settled administrative enforcement actions in a second sweep against four additional promoters of commodity trading systems using the Internet, and filed a civil injunctive action against a fifth. In some of these cases, respondents claimed that they personally profited by trading using their systems when in fact they either never traded or lost money trading. Others claimed that customers had exceptional profits when in fact the customers had not made such profits or had lost money using the trading systems. Some respondents did not make adequate risk disclosures. Others presented profitable hypothetical trades as actual trades and did not include the required disclaimer concerning the limitations of hypothetical trading. By filing these cases in a coordinated Internet sweep, the Commission achieved the removal or clean-up of targeted websites. The Commission also sent the message that fraud on the Internet will be prosecuted as vigorously as fraud that is committed through more traditional media.

The Commission's Internet Project also included a parallel and equally important public education initiative. On the same date that the first sweep cases were filed, the Commission issued a Consumer Advisory warning the public about Internet websites selling commodity trading systems that guarantee high profits with minimal risk. The Advisory warns consumers that: commodity futures and options are typically high risk endeavors; no computer trading system can guarantee profits; and the hypothetical results used by many trading system promoters to advertise their systems can be unreliable. This Consumer Advisory is available on the Commission's Internet website along with other Advisories concerning possible fraudulent activity in the commodity futures and option industry (http://www.cftc.gov/cftc/cftccustomer.htm).

In addition, during the week of February 28, 2000, the Commission participated with law enforcement and consumer protection agencies from 27 countries in an interagency Internet Surf. The Commission alone examined approximately 300 Internet websites and identified dozens for follow-up review. On March 28, 2000, the Commission participated in an Internet Surf day organized by the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) that included the participation of 21 regulators in 18 countries.

On June 15-16, 2000, the Commission and the SEC jointly hosted a second Internet Surveillance Training Program for relevant enforcement staff from IOSCO's Working Party on Enforcement and Exchange of Information (WP4) members. The program was held at the Commission's Washington, DC, headquarters. The Commission reached out to foreign as well as domestic authorities, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), to share knowledge and experiences at the training program. Twenty-two participants from 19 jurisdictions attended the program.

Fraud in Connection with Illegal Commodity Contracts. During FY 2000, the Commission continued to coordinate enforcement actions with public education efforts with respect to wrongdoers who illegally market futures contracts to the general public. The Commission brought enforcement actions against those who fraudulently solicit customers for what are purported to be financed speculative purchases of precious metals and other commodities, but which are, in fact, illegal futures or option contracts. During FY 2000, the Commission brought two civil injunctive actions charging defendants with this type of misconduct: CFTC v. IBS, Inc., et al., No. 3:00 CV 103-V (W.D.N.C. filed Mar. 13, 2000); and CFTC v. National Bullion and Coin, Inc., et al., No. 00-6885 CIV-ZLOCH (S.D. Fla. filed June 28, 2000).

The Commission also issued a Consumer Advisory addressing this issue on July 5, 2000. This Advisory warns the public of companies that purportedly sell investments in precious metals and other commodities based on sales pitches fraudulently claiming that customers can make a lot of money, with little risk, by purchasing metal through a financing agreement. In the Advisory, the Commission warns that companies making such sales pitches often: overstate profit potential while minimizing the risk involved; falsely claim that they are purchasing and storing the metal; and charge phony "storage" and "interest" fees. This Consumer Advisory is available on the Commission's website.

Fraudulent Trade Allocation. During FY 2000, the Commission successfully concluded related injunctive and administrative enforcement proceedings involving a significant fraudulent trade allocation scheme in U.S. Treasury bond futures and option contracts at the CBOT. In November 1999, the Commission filed a civil injunctive action against an introducing broker (IB), Capital Insight Brokerage, Inc. (Capital Insight), and its president, owner, and associated person (AP), S. Jay Goldinger. The complaint alleged that Goldinger and Capital Insight purposefully failed to provide account numbers when they entered their orders with their futures commission merchant (FCM), Refco, Inc. (Refco). They provided the needed account numbers only after they knew the prices at which the trades had been confirmed, which allowed them to allocate profits and losses among their customers. They also allocated trades by transferring certain trades between customer accounts after the trades were executed. On November 12, 1999, the district court entered a consent order of permanent injunction (to which the defendants consented without admitting or denying liability) that permanently enjoined Capital Insight and Goldinger from further violations of the Act and regulations, as charged, and ordered them to pay $6 million in disgorgement.

Goldinger and Capital Insight entered their orders through Refco's phone desk on the floor of the CBOT that was supervised by Refco salesperson Constantine Mitsopoulos. In September 1999, the Commission filed an administrative complaint against Mitsopoulos, a registered floor broker (FB), and three phone clerks who worked for Mitsopoulos, Margaret Dull, Richard Marisie, and Lisa Budicak, based on their role in the fraudulent trade allocation scheme. In a series of orders issued in April and September 2000, the Commission accepted offers of settlement from Mitsopoulos and the phone clerks who, without admitting or denying liability, consented to the entry of orders finding that they failed to comply with order taking and recordkeeping requirements by not obtaining account identification information at the time they received orders from Capital Insight, and by changing the account identification on trades already assigned to a customer account. These cases, and the sanctions imposed, are discussed in more detail below.

Enforcement Cases Filed and Results Achieved During FY 2000

The cases filed, and the results achieved, by the Commission's Enforcement program during FY 2000 are described below.

Internet Project Cases

On May 1, 2000, the Commission announced the initial results of a coordinated enforcement initiative aimed at cleaning up Internet websites that fraudulently promote commodity trading systems and advisory services to the general public. As part of the initiative, the Commission, together with the FTC and the SEC, coordinated the filing and simultaneous settlement of the following 10 administrative enforcement actions. The respondents, without admitting or denying the findings, consented to the entry of Commission orders that directed them to cease and desist from further violations, as charged, and that further ordered them to comply with their undertakings to: not misrepresent the risks or results associated with any commodity futures or option trading system or advisory notice; not present hypothetical trading performance without a disclaimer; and not make any representation regarding the financial benefits of any trading system or advisory notice without first prominently disclosing that futures trading involves high risks with the potential for substantial losses. Civil monetary penalties of $10,000 were imposed against all respondents except those who demonstrated a financial inability to pay the penalty based upon evidence of their financial condition, including a sworn financial disclosure statement.

On September 6, 2000, the Commission filed and simultaneously settled similar enforcement actions against four additional promoters of commodity trading systems using the Internet. In each of these actions, the Commission found that the promoters made fraudulent claims on the Internet concerning the extraordinary profits to be realized by using their systems to trade commodity futures or option contracts. The respondents, without admitting or denying the findings, consented to the entry of Commission orders that directed them to: 1) cease and desist from further violations, as charged; 2) make no unsubstantiated profit or risk claims; 3) pay civil monetary penalties, unless they demonstrated that they did not have the financial ability to pay such a penalty; and 4) as to respondent Moore, suspend his registration with the Commission for a six-month period.

Also on September 6, 2000, the Commission a civil injunctive action against the developer of a commodity trading system marketed to the general public, in part, on the Internet. In CFTC v. Alsafari, the Commission filed a civil injunctive action against Abdullah Alsafari, a/k/a Vincent, Vincenta or Vicenta Alsafari. The Commission complaint alleged that Alsafari fraudulently sold his Japanese yen futures trading system via the Internet and through advertisements in newspapers and demonstrations at local hotels. Specifically, the Commission complaint alleged that Alsafari defrauded customers by guaranteeing profits from the use of his system and by guaranteeing but failing to provide refunds to customers who did not make money. According to the complaint, Alsafari's customers, each of whom paid $3,500 for the trading system, all lost money trading with the system and all but one failed to receive the purchase price refund guaranteed by Alsafari. CFTC v. Alsafari, No. C-00-3202 (N.D.Cal. filed Sept. 6, 2000). On the same date the complaint was filed, the court entered a statutory and temporary restraining order that prohibited the destruction of, and ordered that the Commission be given access to, defendant's books and records, and enjoined defendant from violating the Act and Commission regulations, as charged. CFTC v. Alsafari, No. C-00-3202, Statutory and Temporary Restraining Order, Order for Expedited Discovery and Order to Show Cause Re: Preliminary Injunction (N.D.Cal. entered Sept. 6, 2000).

Quick-Strike Cases

The Commission is committed to responding quickly to enforcement investigations that uncover ongoing fraud. Quick-strike cases are civil injunctive actions that generally are filed in Federal district courts within days or weeks of the discovery of the illegal activity, enabling the program to stop fraud at an early stage and to attempt to preserve customer funds.

On the same date that the complaint was filed, the court entered an ex parte preliminary injunction and restraining order enjoining Ferguson from destroying, and refusing to allow the Commission to inspect, books and records, and imposing an asset freeze. CFTC v. Ferguson, No. 1:00-CV-0300, Preliminary Injunction and Restraining Order (N.D.Ind. entered July 11, 2000). The court subsequently entered a preliminary injunction against Ferguson enjoining him from further violations, as charged; soliciting new customers for commodity futures or option trading or soliciting new deposits of funds from existing customers; and destroying, and failing to allow the Commission access to, books and records. Ferguson's assets were frozen, he was ordered to make a full accounting, and a permanent receiver was appointed. CFTC v. Ferguson, No. 1:00-CV-0300, Preliminary Injunction order (N.D.Ind. entered July 20, 2000).

Violations Involving Managed Funds or Marketing of Trading Systems

Recent years have seen increases in both the number of customers participating in the futures and option markets and the amount of customer funds under management. During FY 2000, the Commission prosecuted the following enforcement actions against those acting as CPOs and commodity trading advisors (CTAs) who sought to exploit this growth through fraudulent schemes and other violations involving managed funds and/or the marketing of trading systems.

Pool Fraud

The next day, the court issued an ex parte restraining order freezing the defendants' assets and prohibiting the destruction of documents. CFTC v. Pension America, Inc., et al., No. 00-2071 RHK/SRN, Statutory Restraining Order (D.Minn. entered Sept. 7, 2000). On September 15, 2000, the court entered orders of preliminary injunction against each defendant and the relief defendant. CFTC v. Pension America, Inc., et al., No. 00-2071 RHK/SRN, Order of Preliminary Injunction and Other Ancillary Relief Against Defendants William J. Relf, Specialized Commodity Timing, LLC, and Commodity Timing Specialists, LLC (D.Minn. entered Sept. 15, 2000); CFTC v. Pension America, Inc., et al., No. 00-2071 RHK/SRN, Consent Order of Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief Against Kidz First International, Inc. (D.Minn. entered Sept. 15, 2000); CFTC v. Pension America, Inc., et al., No. 00-2071 RHK/SRN, Consent Order of Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief Against Edward Stevenson Kirris, III, Selective Futures Management, LLC (D.Minn. entered Sept. 15, 2000); and CFTC v. Pension America, Inc., et al., No. 00-2071 RHK/SRN, Consent Order of Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief Against Leonard G. Nauman, Pension America, Inc. and Futures Profit Making, LLC (D.Minn. entered Sept. 15, 2000).

Pool Fraud Case Results

During FY 2000, the Enforcement program obtained results in the following cases previously filed in the area of pool fraud:

Trading Systems

Trading Systems Case Results

During FY 2000, the Enforcement program obtained results in the following cases previously filed in the area of trading systems:

Managed Accounts

Violations by IBs, FCMs, and Their APs

During FY 2000, as in past years, the Commission devoted significant time and attention to matters involving violations by IBs, FCMs, and their APs. Such cases often involve fraudulent misrepresentations, usually to small retail customers, to induce them to invest.

Unlawful Commission Kickbacks

Unauthorized Trading

IB Solicitation Fraud

IB Solicitation Fraud Case Results

During FY 2000, the Enforcement program obtained results in the following cases previously filed in the area of customer solicitation fraud:

Illegal Instruments

The Commission also investigates and prosecutes the sale of illegal futures and option contracts to the public. During FY 2000, the Commission filed enforcement actions, and achieved results in previously filed actions, involving illegal instruments relating to previous metals, foreign currency, and hedge-to-arrive agricultural contracts.

Precious Metals

In July 2000, the court entered a preliminary injunction against defendants imposing an asset freeze and enjoining defendants from further violations, as charged, as well as soliciting new customers or new deposits from existing customers. CFTC v. Nat'l Bullion and Coin, Inc., et al., No. 00-6885 CIV-ZLOCH, Preliminary Injunction (S.D.Fla. entered July 25, 2000). In September 2000, the court issued orders of permanent injunction by default against the defendants that: enjoined them from further violations, as charged, soliciting customers or accepting funds for commodity futures or option trading, and seeking registration in any capacity or acting in any capacity (including an exempt capacity) as a registrant; and continued the asset freeze against the defendants and receivership over the corporate defendants. The court entered judgment in favor of the Commission as to civil monetary penalties, restitution, and disgorgement, and ordered the Commission to submit evidence and arguments supporting final amounts of the proposed monetary relief. CFTC v. Nat'l Bullion and Coin, Inc., et al., No. 00-6885 CIV-ZLOCH, Permanent Injunction and Entry of Final Judgment by Default Against Defendant Joseph B. Flanigan (S.D.Fla. entered Sept. 11, 2000); CFTC v. Nat'l Bullion and Coin, Inc., et al., No. 00-6885 CIV-ZLOCH, Permanent Injunction and Entry of Final Judgment by Default Against Defendant Lawrence Colman (S.D.Fla. entered Sept. 11, 2000); CFTC v. Nat'l Bullion and Coin, Inc., et al., No. 00-6885 CIV-ZLOCH, Permanent Injunction and Entry of Final Judgment by Default Against Defendants National Bullion and Coin, Inc. and Capital Credit Management & Finance, Inc. (S.D.Fla. entered Sept. 11, 2000).

Case Results in the Area of Illegal Instruments

During FY 2000, the Enforcement program obtained results in the following cases previously filed in the area of illegal instruments:

Precious Metals Case Results

Foreign Currency Case Results

Hedge-to-Arrive (HTA) Contracts Case Results

Trade Practice Violations

During FY 2000, the Commission's Enforcement program continued to pursue actions that address specific types of trade practice violations affecting the interests of customers and the integrity of futures markets.

Fraudulent Trade Allocation

In two separate orders issued in April and September 2000, the Commission also accepted offers of settlement from the three Refco phone clerks who worked for Mitsopoulos, Margaret Dull, Richard Marisie, and Lisa Budicak. Without admitting or denying the findings, Dull, Marisie, and Budicak consented to the entry of orders finding that they had violated the Act and Commission regulations, and aided and abetted Refco's recordkeeping violations, by not obtaining account identification information at the time they received orders from Capital Insight and by changing the account identification on trades already assigned to a customer account. As sanctions, the Commission: directed Dull, Marisie, and Budicak to cease and desist from further violations, as charged; ordered Dull and Marisie to comply with their undertaking to restrict for two years their order-taking activities with respect to orders placed for others; ordered Marisie to comply with his undertaking to restrict his FB registration for a period of two years, and ordered Dull to similarly restrict her registration should she register with the Commission within the next two years; prohibited Budicak from certain futures and option-related activities for three years and provided that for four years from the date of the order, if Budicak registers with the Commission, it will be conditioned and her trading activity will be supervised; and ordered Dull and Marisie each to pay $15,000, and Budicak to pay $20,000, in civil monetary penalties. In re Mitsopoulos, et al., CFTC Docket No. 99-17, Order Making Findings and Imposing Remedial Sanctions As To Respondents Margaret Dull And Richard Marisie (CFTC entered April 10, 2000); In re Mitsopoulos, et al., CFTC Docket No. 99-17, Order Making Findings And Imposing Remedial Sanctions As To Respondent Lisa Budicak (CFTC entered Sept. 26, 2000).

Misappropriation of Trades

Exceeding Speculative Position Limits

Trade Practice Case Results

During FY 2000, the Enforcement program obtained results in the following case previously filed in the trade practice area:

Financial, Supervision, Compliance and Recordkeeping

In its efforts to promote sound practices of firms handling customer funds, the Commission investigates and prosecutes registrants' failures to supervise diligently the handling of customer accounts and to establish adequate compliance systems to prevent fraud or market abuse, as well as other financial violations.

Financial, Supervision, Compliance and Recordkeeping Case Results

During FY 2000, the Enforcement program obtained results in the following cases previously filed in this area:

In the second order, the Commission found that First Options violated recordkeeping requirements by making delayed and incomplete responses to requests for floor order tickets in a Commission enforcement investigation. Without admitting or denying the findings, First Options consented to the entry of the Commission order that: directed it to cease and desist from further violations, as charged; ordered it to pay a civil monetary penalty of $40,000; and required the firm to comply with its undertaking to maintain its recently implemented compliance procedures, or other procedures reasonably designed to ensure timely responses to regulatory requests for required records. In re First Options of Chicago, Inc., CFTC Docket No. 99-3, Order Making Findings And Imposing Remedial Sanctions (CFTC entered Jan. 27, 2000).

Violations of Commission Orders

During FY 2000, the Commission also filed enforcement actions alleging violations of prior Commission orders.

Violation of Commission Orders Case Results

During FY 2000, the Enforcement program obtained results in the following case previously filed in this area:

Statutory Disqualification

The Commission investigates and prosecutes administrative registration cases based on statutory disqualification (SD). While most SD actions are commenced by the NFA as part of its delegated authority to handle registration functions for the Commission, the Commission has retained authority to act directly in appropriate cases.

Cooperative Enforcement

Domestic Cooperative Actions

Cooperative enforcement efforts enhance the ability of the Commission's Division of Enforcement to promote compliance with, and to deter violations of, Federal commodities laws. During FY 2000, the Division coordinated enforcement efforts with numerous local, State, and Federal law enforcement and regulatory authorities and agencies, which resulted in the filing of several administrative and injunctive actions. The Division's cooperation with law enforcement agencies also resulted in the filing of criminal charges by those agencies.

Other Domestic Cooperative Initiatives

During FY 2000, the Division of Enforcement also participated in other domestic initiatives designed to promote cooperation among U.S. authorities.

International Cooperation

As the number of financial transactions that cross national borders has continued to grow, the Division of Enforcement and its foreign counterparts have found it increasingly necessary to share documents and testimony, and to conduct joint investigations. In FY 2000, the Division made 18 requests for assistance to foreign authorities, and it received 23 requests from authorities in foreign jurisdictions. The information exchanged between the Commission and foreign authorities has included registration and disciplinary histories of U.S. and foreign firms and individuals, as well as evidence (including testimony and bank and brokerage account records) for use in investigations and enforcement actions.

During FY 2000, the Division also participated in international initiatives designed to promote cooperation among authorities.

On March 28, 2000, WP4 held an "International Internet Surf Day" that included the participation of 21 regulators in 18 countries. The Division contributed to the organization of the event and prepared the instructional materials and reporting forms. WP4 members surveyed the Internet in order to detect fraudulent or otherwise illegal schemes involving investment and trading opportunities in securities and derivatives. IOSCO members visited approximately 10,000 websites and identified approximately 1,000 sites for further review, including approximately 250 sites that involved cross-border activity. Commission staff surveyed 1,060 websites and identified 88 for follow up review, including 72 involving cross-border activity. The sites identified for follow-up review by the Commission and NFA involve commodity futures and options in a variety of ways, such as: computerized trading systems promising highly successful buy and sell signals; trade recommendations based on seasonal trends in the prices of commodities such as heating oil and gasoline; and purported profit opportunities on commodities such as foreign currencies, precious metals, and stock indices.

On June 15-16, 2000, the Commission and the SEC jointly hosted an Internet Surveillance Training Program for relevant enforcement staff from WP4 members. The program was held at the Commission's Washington, DC headquarters. This training program brought together experts from regulators with Internet enforcement programs to provide instruction on areas such as the use of search engines for detecting securities offenses, Internet resources that identify authors of anonymous newsgroup postings and e-mail messages, and methods of preserving and authenticating electronic evidence. There also was a panel discussion concerning the organization of Internet surveillance and Internet enforcement programs. The Commission reached out to foreign authorities as well as domestic, such as the FBI, to share their knowledge and experiences at the training program. Twenty-two participants from 19 different jurisdictions attended the program.

Table 1
ENFORCEMENT CASES FILED DURING FY 2000
LISTED BY PROGRAM AREA

Name of Case Press Release No. Date Filed
Internet Project Cases
In re Taybi 4397-00 05/01/00
In re Calo 4397-00 05/01/00
In re Coleman 4397-00 05/01/00
In re Judd 4397-00 05/01/00
In re Oasis Publishing Corp., et al. 4397-00 05/01/00
In re Read, et al. 4397-00 05/01/00
In re Salter 4397-00 05/01/00
In re Schoemmell, et al. 4397-00 05/01/00
In re Reily 4397-00 05/01/00
In re Trendy Systems, LLC, et al. 4397-00 05/01/00
In re Moore 4442-00 09/06/00
In re Int'l Trading Systems, Ltd., et al. 4442-00 09/06/00
In re Martin 4442-00 09/06/00
In re Heffernan, et al. 4442-00 09/06/00
CFTC v. Alsafari 4442-00 09/06/00
 
Quick-Strike Cases
CFTC v. Mobley, et al. 4368-00 02/22/00
CFTC v. Konkel 4401-00 05/01/00
CFTC v. Ferguson 4420-00 07/11/00
CFTC v. Brockbank, et al. 4437-00 08/08/00
 
Violations Involving Managed Funds or Marketing of Trading Systems
In re Velissaris 4349-00 12/16/99
In re Dixon 4350-99 12/16/99
In re Currency Trading Systems, et al. 4369-00 02/28/00
In re Harley 4403-00 05/31/00
In re Lavender 4413-00 06/29/00
In re Kim, et al 4412-00 06/29/00
CFTC v. Dormagen, et al. 4438-00 07/03/00
In re Billings, et al. 4422-00 07/17/00
CFTC v. Pension America, Inc., et al. 4445-00 09/06/00
In re Systems of Success-Window to Profit, et al. 4444-00 09/06/00
CFTC v. Sabin, et al. 4451-00 09/26/00
In re CTS Financial Publishing, Inc., et al. 4455-00 09/28/00
 
Name of Case Press Release No. Date Filed
Violations by IBs, FCMs, and Their APs
In re Sogemin Metals, Inc. 4360-00 02/07/00
In re Osler 4366-00 02/18/00
In re Den Hartog, et al. 4375-00 03/07/00
In re Mock 4411-00 06/27/00
CFTC v. Matrix Trading Group, Inc., et al. 4454-00 09/26/00
In re First Financial Trading, Inc., et al. 4454-00 09/28/00
 
Illegal Instruments
CFTC v. IBS, Inc., et al. 4417-00 03/13/00
CFTC v. Nat'l Bullion and Coin, Inc., et al. 4415-00 06/28/00
 
Trade Practice Violations
In re DeMarco None 12/13/99
In re Thompson 4404-00 05/31/00
In re Bengson 4410-00 06/27/00
In re Fraites, et al. 4433-00 08/07/00
 
Financial, Supervision, Compliance and Recordkeeping
In re Peregrine Financial Group, Inc. 4443-00 09/07/00
 
Violations of Commission Orders
In re Brenner, et al. 4387-00 03/30/00
In re Rogers 4450-00 09/25/00
 
Statutory Disqualification
In re Capital Insight Brokerage, Inc. 4363-00 02/16/00
In re Chulik 4364-00 02/17/00
In re Itzkowitz 4388-00 03/31/00
In re Stephens 4408-00 06/19/00
In re Laken 4408-00 06/19/00
In re Pelton Street Publishing, Inc. 4361-00 07/24/00

Table 2
INJUNCTIVE ACTIONS

Fiscal Year Actions Initiated Defendants Named
1991 11 18
1992 18 50
1993 11 60
1994 10 34
1995 11 27
1996 17 45
1997 17 43
1998 18 96
1999 20 61
2000 12 57

Table 3
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

Fiscal Year Actions Initiated Respondents Named
1991 31 51
1992 36 79
1993 45 72
1994 33 60
1995 41 72
1996 21 32
1997 23 48
1998 23 47
1999 25 47
2000 41 68

Table 4
PERFORMANCE STATISTICS - FY 2000
CASES

Opened 53
Closed 81
Pending 80

SANCTIONS ASSESSED1

 Administrative Cases
  Persons Subject to Cease and Desist Orders: 73
  Persons Subject to Trading Prohibitions: 25
  Persons Subject to Registration Suspensions, Denials or Revocations: 25
  Amount of Civil Monetary Penalties [$000]2: 7,423
     Number of Persons Assessed: 42
  Amount of Restitution or Disgorgement Ordered [$000]:3 22,005
     Number of persons assessed: 8
 Civil Cases
  Persons Enjoined:
     Ex parte Restraining Orders 33
     Preliminary Injunctions 56
     Permanent Injunctions 70
  Equity Receivers Appointed: 3
  Assets Placed Under Receiver's Protection [$000]: 0
  Amount of Civil Monetary Penalties [$000]: 115,204
     Number of persons assessed: 18
  Amount of Restitution or Disgorgement Ordered [$000]4: 136,639
     Number of persons assessed): 61


1 This report includes only those sanctions that became final during FY 2000. This includes sanctions assessed in settled matters and unappealed decisions of the Commission, U.S. district courts, or U.S. courts of appeals.
2 Of this amount, $400,000 was ordered paid pursuant to a ten-year payment plan in which the actual amount paid by the respondent depends upon the level of his income during the time period of the payment plan.
3 Of this amount, $13,391,695 was ordered paid pursuant to multi-year payment plans in which the actual amount paid by the defendant/respondent depends upon the level of her/his income during the time period of the payment plan.
4 Of this amount, $21,710,599 was ordered paid pursuant to multi-year payment plans in which the actual amount paid by the defendant/respondent depends upon the level of her/his income during the time period of the payment plan.