U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 22564 / December 7, 2012
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. ERIC TODD SEIDEN AND KAMAL ABDALLAH, Civil Action No. CV 09-3116 (KAM) (EDNY)
COURT ENTERS FINAL JUDGMENTS BY CONSENT AGAINST SEC DEFENDANTS ERIC TODD SEIDEN AND KAMAL ABDALLAH
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that on March 30, 2012, the Honorable Kiyo A. Matsumoto, United States District Court Judge for the Eastern District of New York, entered a final judgment by consent against Defendant Kamal Abdallah. The final judgment permanently enjoins Abdallah from future violations of Sections 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, prohibits Abdallah from acting as an officer or director of a public company, and bars him from participating in an offering of penny stock. The final judgment also orders Abdallah liable for disgorgement and prejudgment interest totaling $214,963.02, deemed satisfied by the restitution order entered against Abdallah in the parallel criminal action, United States v. Abdallah, 09-cr-717 (JFB) (E.D.N.Y.).
On April 16, 2012, Judge Matsumoto modified a June 30, 2011 judgment by consent against Eric Todd Seiden, enjoining him from future violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder and barring Seiden from participating in an offering of penny stock. The judgment also provided that Seiden would pay disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and a civil penalty as determined by the Court upon motion of the Commission. On April 16, 2012, in view of the restitution order and prison sentence imposed on Seiden in the parallel criminal case, United States v. Seiden, 09-cr-582 (ILG) (E.D.N.Y.), the Commission withdrew its claims against Seiden for disgorgement and a penalty.
The Commission’s amended complaint, filed in the Eastern District of New York, alleges that Seiden, a former securities professional, and Abdallah, the former CEO of Universal Property Development & Acquisition Corp. (“UPDV”), conspired to create artificial demand for UPDV stock and inflate its stock price. The Amended Complaint charges Seiden with violating Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Abdallah with violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.
For further information, please see Litigation Release No. 21179 (August 18, 2009).
The Commission acknowledges the assistance of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.