UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
In the Matter of
CARMEL EQUITY PARTNERS,
|ORDER MAKING FINDINGS AND IMPOSING REMEDIAL SANCTIONS AND CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER AGAINST RESPONDENT LAWRENCE D. ISEN|
The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") instituted public administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act"), and Sections 15(b), 19(h) and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") in this matter on November 18, 1996.1 Respondent Lawrence D. Isen ("Isen") has submitted an Offer of Settlement ("Offer") which the Commission has determined to accept.
Solely for the purpose of these proceedings and any other proceedings brought by or on behalf of the Commission or in which the Commission is a party, and without admitting or denying the findings herein, except for those contained in paragraphs II. A., B., C. and E. below, which are admitted, Isen consents to the entry of this Order.
On the basis of this Order and Respondent's Offer, the Commission makes the following findings:
A. Cohig & Associates Inc. ("Cohig") is a broker-dealer registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Exchange Act (File No. 8-33481) since March 1985, with its principal place of business in Denver, Colorado. At relevant times, it maintained a branch office in Solana Beach, California.
B. At all times relevant to this proceeding, Eagle Holdings, Inc. ("Eagle") was a reporting company with its principal place of business in Mesa, Arizona. At all times relevant herein, Eagle common stock was traded on NASDAQ.
C. Isen is a resident of San Diego, California. He was employed by Cohig as a registered representative in its Solana Beach office from approximately November 1991 to May 1995.
D. From at least September 1992 through February 1993, Isen willfully violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, in that he, directly or indirectly, in connection with the offer, purchase or sale of certain securities, by use of the means or instrumentalities of interstate commerce and by use of the mails, employed devices, schemes, or artifices to defraud, obtained money and property by means of, and made, untrue statements of material fact and omitted to state material facts necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, and engaged in transactions, acts, practices, or courses of business which would and did operate as a fraud or deceit upon purchasers of such securities.
1. As part of the aforesaid conduct, Isen, while a registered representative at Cohig, received undisclosed payments, directly and indirectly, from persons controlling or otherwise affiliated with Eagle, in return for selling Eagle stock to investors.
E. On November 16, 2000, Isen was convicted by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York of one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and wire fraud based upon his receipt of undisclosed payments for selling Eagle stock (U.S. v. Isen, Case No. S2-98-Cr. 207 (RPP)(S.D.N.Y.).
In view of the foregoing, it is in the public interest to impose the sanctions specified in the Offer.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
A. Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act and Section 21C of the Exchange Act, Isen be, and hereby is, ordered to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; and
B. Isen shall comply with his undertaking to provide, at the Commission's request, on reasonable notice and without service of a subpoena, discovery and to testify truthfully at any deposition and at any judicial or administrative proceeding related to the order instituting proceedings in this matter or any allegations therein, or any other proceeding brought by the Commission as a result of its investigation titled In the Matter of Eagle Holdings, Inc., and that he will continue to be considered a party to this action for purposes of the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 [12 U.S.C. 3401-22], except that Isen does not hereby waive his privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
By the Commission.
Jonathan G. Katz
|1||The Commission is not imposing sanctions against Isen pursuant to Sections 15(b) and 19(h) of the Exchange Act because Isen was previously barred from association with any broker or dealer. In the Matter of Martin Herer Engleman, Peter Paul Kim and Lawrence David Isen, Admin. Proc. File No. 3-7719, 1995 SEC LEXIS 1197, 52 S.E.C. 271 (May 18, 1995), aff'd, Isen v. S.E.C., 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 15635 (9th Cir. 1996).|
|Home | Previous Page||