Securities & Exchange Commission v. Rose Fund LLC

MEMORANDUM **

Paul Nelson appeals pro se the district court’s order and final judgment: (1) granting summary judgment in favor of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) in the SEC’s action alleging fraud in the offer and sale of unregistered securities, (2) issuing a permanent injunction enjoining Nelson from committing future violations of the federal securities laws, (3) requiring Nelson to disgorge $93,987.22, and (4) imposing a $10,000 civil penalty. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We reject Nelson’s contention that the district court abused its discretion by striking his declaration filed in opposition to the SEC’s summary judgment motion. “[A] district court has discretion in its response to a party’s invocation of the Fifth.” SEC v. Colello, 139 F.3d 674 , 677 (9th Cir.1998) (citing with approval SEC v. Benson, 657 F.Supp. 1122, 1129 (S.D.N.Y. 1987), where the court barred the defendant who had invoked his Fifth Amendment right from introducing evidence precluding summary judgment against him).

Reviewing de novo, we reject Nelson’s contention that he was entitled to a jury trial on the issue of disgorgement. See SEC v. Rind, 991…