U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission
SEC Seal
Home | Previous Page
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Litigation Release No. 20445 / February 1, 2008

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Thomas A. Skoulis and Peter M. Frankl, Case No. C-06-2239-JF (N.D. Cal.)

Court Enters Final Judgment, by Consent, Against Thomas A. Skoulis and Peter M. Frankl

On January 23, 2008, United States District Judge Jeremy Fogel of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California entered Final Judgments as to Defendants Thomas A. Skoulis and Peter M. Frankl, based on their respective Consent to Final Judgment submitted by each of the to settle the Securities and Exchange Commission's case.

Each Final Judgment, to which each defendant consented without admitting or denying the Commission's allegations against him, provides that each defendant is enjoined from future violations of Sections 10(b) and 13(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 and 13b2-1 thereunder, and from aiding and abetting violations of Sections 13(a) and 13(b)(2)(A) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1, 13a-13 thereunder. The Final Judgment as to Skoulis further orders that he is barred from acting as an officer or director of a public company for five years, that he pay a civil penalty in the amount of $30,000, and that he disgorge, with prejudgment interest, $23,623.37. The Final Judgment as to Frankl further orders that he pay a civil penalty in the amount of $25,000.

The Commission's complaint, filed in March 2006, alleges that both defendants Skoulis and Frankl violated, or aided and abetted violations of, the antifraud provisions and related reporting and recordkeeping provisions of the Exchange Act, by entering into two undisclosed side arrangements, on behalf of Netopia, Inc. (formerly an Emeryville, California company), and caused the company to materially overstate the company's financial results during the quarterly periods when the transactions were recorded as revenue.

For more information, see Litigation Release No. 19630 (March 29, 2006).

 

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2008/lr20445.htm

Modified: 02/05/2008