Securities and Exchange Commission v. Paul S. Rubera, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Paul S. Rubera

Bad Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 13169·350 F.3d 1084·2003 WL 22870967·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10450·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 24473
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 5, 200302-35886, 02-35907California6,017 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alarcon, J.

In this civil enforcement action filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Sections 20(d)(1) and 22(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. §§ 77t(d)(1), 77v(a), and Sections 21(d)(3)(A), 21(e), and 27 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78u(d)(3)(A), 78u(e), 78aa, (collectively “Securities Acts”), the district court entered judgment against Paul S. Rubera for violation of the registration provisions of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933. 15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a), (e). The district court entered judgment in favor of Mr. Rubera on the second and third claims of the complaint which alleged that Mr. Rubera used interstate commerce in the offer or sale of securities for purposes of committing fraud in violation of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77q(a), and Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. 17 C.F.R. § 240 .10b-5. Each party has appealed.

Mr. Rubera seeks reversal of the judgment that he violated the registration provisions of the Securities Acts. He contends that the district court erred as a matter of law in determining…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.