U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 20093 / April 26, 2007
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Global Health; Global Clearing; Global Securities; Goldman Quintero & Associates; Vince Dory; and Joshua Adams, Civil Action No. 04-CV-1802-JM (BLM) (S.D. Cal.)
Federal Judge Permanently Enjoins Six San Diego Defendants in a Securities Fraud Scheme
The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") announced that on April 11, 2007, the Honorable Jeffrey T. Miller, United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, entered a default judgment against two San Diego defendants: Vince Dory and Joshua Adams, ages and residences unknown. Previously, on December 12, 2006, the Court entered a default judgment against the other four defendants, which are all San Diego entities: Global Health, Global Clearing, Global Strategies and Goldman Quintero & Associates ("Goldman" and collectively the "Entity Defendants").
The Commission's complaint, which was filed on September 9, 2004, alleged that the defendants cold called prospective investors and falsely represented, that Global Health had developed a cancer treatment that was on the verge of receiving, and then actually received, FDA approval. The defendants also sent letters to prospective investors on FDA letterhead that stated that Global Health's cancer treatment had been approved by the FDA and that it could soon begin marketing its product. The complaint alleged that the FDA letters were forgeries, and the statements that they contained were false.
The judgments permanently enjoin each of the defendants from future violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17 (a) of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act") and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act"), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The judgments also permanently enjoin Dory, Adams, and the Entity Defendants, except Global Health, from future violations of Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act. Additionally, the judgments order all of the defendants, jointly and severally, to pay $247,250 in disgorgement of ill-gotten gains. Furthermore, the December 12 judgment orders the Entity Defendants to pay $11,328.39 in prejudgment interest and assesses a $100,000 civil penalty against each of them. The April 11 judgment orders Dory and Adams to pay $11,929.63 in prejudgment interest and assesses a $120,000 civil penalty against each of them.
For more information, see Litigation Release No. 18881 (September 10, 2004) and Litigation Release No. 18922 (October 6, 2004).