Litigation Release No. 23590 / July 5, 2016

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Richard Grossman, No. 1:16-mc-01189 (GMH) (D.D.C. filed June 6, 2016)

SEC Subpoena Enforcement Action Against New York Resident Dismissed After He Complies with Subpoena

The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that, on July 1, 2016, it filed a notice of voluntary dismissal in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in its subpoena enforcement action against Richard Grossman, a resident of West Hempstead, New York. The Commission filed the notice after Grossman complied with the Commission's subpoena. After the notice was filed, on July 1, 2016, the district court entered an order dismissing the case without prejudice.

The subpoena, which was served on Grossman in April 2016, required that he produce certain documents and compelled his testimony before the Commission staff. The subpoena is related to the SEC's investigation into potential violations of the federal securities laws arising from suspicious trading in the securities of ophthalmology research and development company Ohr Pharmaceutical, Inc. According to the SEC's application for enforcement of the subpoena, an attorney representing Grossman told the staff that he would advise his client not to comply with the subpoena absent a court order. As a result, on June 6, 2016, the SEC filed the action seeking enforcement of the subpoena.

On June 7, 2016, the district court issued an order to show cause, directing Grossman to explain why he had refused to comply with the subpoena. Before responding to the district court's order or filing a response to the SEC's application for enforcement, Grossman produced documents responsive to the subpoena and, on June 30, 2016, appeared for testimony at SEC headquarters, where he was sworn in and answered questions from the Commission staff.

The SEC is continuing its fact-finding investigation in this matter and, to date, has not concluded that any individual or entity has violated the federal securities laws.

See also: Litigation Release No. 23559 (June 6, 2016).