Broker-Dealer Litigation - Greenberg Traurig LLP

federal district court entered a final judgment by consent against Biddlecome, permanently
enjoining him from future violations of the securities registration, broker-dealer registration and
antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws. The Commission’s complaint alleged that
Biddlecome sold unregistered interests in a fund, made several misrepresentations in connection
with the sale of interests in the fund, and was not associated with a registered broker-dealer for
purposes of selling the interests. The Commission also alleged that the fund’s offering
documents stated that the fund would invest in real property, but Biddlecome instead used
investors’ funds to engage in speculative short-term trading through a brokerage account in his
own name. The Commission barred Biddlecome from association and from participating in any
offering of penny stock, with the right to reapply after three years.
Q.1.c(ii)
In re MMR Inv. Bankers, LLC, Release No. 64622, 2011 SEC LEXIS 1963 (June 8, 2011); In re
MMR Investment Bankers, LLC, Release No. 64623, 2011 SEC LEXIS 1964 (June 8, 2011); In
re MMR Investment Bankers, LLC, Release No. 64624, 2011 SEC LEXIS 1965 (June 8, 2011);
In re MMR Investment Bankers, LLC, Release No. 64625, 2011 SEC LEXIS 1966 (June 8,
2011); In re MMR Investment Bankers, LLC, Release No. 64626, 2011 SEC LEXIS 1967 (June
8, 2011).
The Commission accepted offers of settlement from MMR Investment Bankers LLC, a
registered broker-dealer, Martin, its president and majority owner, Rankin, its vice-president and
assistant compliance officer, and Hubert and Fimreite, registered representatives at the Firm.
According to the Commission, Martin and Rankin assisted in the preparation of disclosure
documents for certain private placement debenture offerings, and Hubert and Fimreite
recommended and sold the debentures to customers. Respondents were reckless in not knowing
of material omissions in the disclosure documents, including that Martin and Rankin had created
a new company, in which Martin, Rankin, Fimreite, and Hubert’s wife owned shares, to manage
the proceeds of the debenture sales, that this company received management fees that were
charged to the offering companies, and that Martin Rankin, Hubert and Fimreite had received
shares in some of the offering companies. Additionally, Respondents were reckless in not
knowing that the Firm was selling the debentures to customers for whom they were unsuitable.
The Commission ordered the Firm and individual respondents to cease and desist from
committing or causing any violations and future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act
of 1933, Sections 10(b) and 15(c) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rules 10b-5 and
17a-3(a)(17)(i)(B)(1) thereunder. The Commission also censured the Firm and revoked its
registration. Based on a sworn statement of financial condition, the Commission declined to
impose a penalty against the Firm. The Commission barred the individual respondents from
association and from participating in any offering of a penny stock, ordered Martin to pay a
$30,000 civil fine, disgorgement of $25,200 and prejudgment interest of $2,292; Rankin to pay a
$15,000 civil fine; Hubert to pay a $20,000 civil fine disgorgement of $39,615 and prejudgment
interest of $3,603; and Fimreite to pay disgorgement of $2,644 and prejudgment interest of $240.
The Commission declined to impose a penalty against Fimreite based on his sworn statement of
financial condition.
410