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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Rel. No.43033 / July 13, 2000

Admin. Proc. File No. 3-4627


In the Matter of

MARK E. ROSS


:
:
:
:
:

  ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
VACATE COMMISSION ORDER

Mark E. Ross seeks to vacate the order entered against him by consent on March 10, 1975, barring him from association with any broker-dealer, investment company, or investment adviser (the "Order").1 The Division of Enforcement supports Ross' motion to vacate the Order.

In the Order, we found that Ross had violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 19342 and Rule 10b-53 thereunder by dominating, controlling, and manipulating the market in the stock of Elinvest, Inc. and by creating a false and misleading appearance of a widespread and independent interest in that stock.

In arguing that our Order should be vacated, Ross points out that the Order was entered twenty-five years ago when he was only nineteen years of age. Since that time, we have relaxed certainrestrictions imposed on Ross by the Order. For example, in January 1987, we consented to Ross's association with The Equitable Life Assurance Society as a registered representative for the limited purpose of selling investment company and variable contract insurance products. In November 1987, we consented to Ross' association with First Equity Corporation as a general securities principal. Ross is now a general securities principal and major shareholder for Mark Ross & Co., a broker-dealer. Ross emphasizes that, since the issuance of the Order, he has participated in various segments of the securities industry and has not been the subject of any regulatory proceeding or sanction.

Ross contends that the Order imposes burdensome requirements that are no longer needed to regulate his conduct. Ross further contends that the Order hinders his dealings with prospective clients who are understandably troubled by the existence of the bar. Ross requests that we vacate the Order to eliminate these hardships and to allow him greater professional mobility within the securities industry.

The Division believes that the Order is no longer needed to protect investors. The Division notes that twenty-five years have passed since Ross' misconduct. During that time, Ross has been associated with insurance companies and broker-dealer firms,and his record has remained unblemished.4 Under all the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to vacate our prior Order.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the application of Mark E. Ross to vacate the order entered against him on March 10, 1975, be, and it hereby is, granted; and that the order be, and it hereby is, vacated.

By the Commission.

Jonathan G. Katz
Secretary

Footnotes

1  Mark E. Ross, Exchange Act Rel. No. 34-11283 (Mar. 10, 1975), 6 SEC Docket 423.

2  15 U.S.C. § 78j(b).

3  17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5.

4 See, e.g., John W. Bendall, Jr., 52 S.E.C. 1226 (1997) (order barring association with a broker-dealer vacated where record of compliance with the securities laws demonstrated over an extended period of twenty-eight years).




http://www.sec.gov/litigation/opinions/34-43033.htm

Modified: 10/31/2001