Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NO: 15-2451
RONALD L. BLACKBURN, ET AL
SECTION: J(1)
December
Commission
various
15,
(SEC)
claims
filed
under
Securities
Exchange
widespread
scheme
2014,
a
the
Act
by
the
Securities
Complaint
Securities
of
the
1934.
against
Act
The
individual
of
and
Exchange
Defendants
1933
Complaint
Defendants
and
alleges
to
for
the
a
defraud
of
the
federal
securities
laws
with
respect
to
2009
convicted
and
felon,
2013
by
(1)
controlled
concealing
Treaty
as
that
de
Blackburn,
facto
officer
and
Belize;
involving
(3)
the
perpetuating
issuance
unrestricted
Treaty
millions
dollars
of
unwitting
unregistered
Complaint
offering
alleges
and
stock
investors;
transfer
through
selling
and
of
that
fraudulent
(4)
oil
as
gas
result
worthless
an
working
of
scheme
restricted
Defendants
conducting
and
a
of
which
virtually
trading
raised
stock
illegal
interests.
their
and
to
and
The
misconduct,
that
the
SECs
claim
is
not
about
violations
of
the
abusing
its
process,
namely
group
of
people
of
Civil
Procedure
12(f),
because
they
are
immaterial,
that
the
SEC
staff
attorney
who
initiated
this
matter
restating
the
claim
and
ending
simply
with
the
than
respond
with
evidence
of
specific
facts
allegations
accompanying
contained
Statement
of
in
Defendants
Uncontested
Facts,
brief
which
and
the
are
not
the
record
but
refrains
from
making
credibility
All
reasonable
inferences
are
drawn
in
favor
of
the
at
1075.
court
ultimately
must
be
satisfied
that
1991)
(citation
omitted).
The
nonmoving
party
can
then
the
dispositive
issue
is
one
on
which
the
nonmoving
party will bear the burden of proof at trial, the moving party
must demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material
fact,
but
need
not
negate
the
elements
of
the
nonmovant's
motion
must
be
denied,
regardless
of
the
nonmovant's
burden
is
not
satisfied
with
some
The
metaphysical
Court
their
must
first
initial
determine
burden.
whether
Simply
Defendants
filing
motion
have
for
in
opposition
to
the
motion,
the
moving
party
must
Celotex,
477
U.S.
at
323).
This
initial
burden
remains with the moving party even when the issue involved is
one on which the non-movant will bear the burden of proof at
trial. Id. Thus, the movant must discharge the burden the Rules
place upon him: It is not enough to move for summary judgment
without supporting the motion in any way or with a conclusory
fact
cannot
be
genuinely
disputed
must
support
the
or]
(B)
showing
that
the
materials
cited
do
not
the
instant
case,
Defendants
cite
to
six
exhibits
four
other
defendants
(Rec.
Doc.
74-3);
an
chain
None
of
the
supported
by
Defendants
citation
to
Uncontested
the
record
or
Material
any
Facts
other
are
materials.
addition,
Defendants
cite
SEC
v.
Wheeling-Pittsburgh
process.
482
F.
Wheeling-Pittsburgh,
subpoena
allowed
Supp.
the
555,
district
565
court
(W.D.
Pa.
refused
duces
tecum
because
it
believed
that
biased
third
parties
to
influence
the
1979).
to
In
enforce
the
SEC
had
investigative
However,
Steel
Corp.,
Defendants
648
reliance
F.2d
on
118,
the
128
(3d
district
Cir.
courts
Rather
than
support
their
motion
for
summary
judgment,
SEC
to
go
beyond
the
pleadings
to
show
specific
facts
creating a genuine issue for trial, 1 and the Court must deny the
motion.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly,
It should be noted, however, that the SEC truly walked the razor's edge with
their response to the [Defendants] motion. Ashe, 992 F.2d at 544 n.5. If
the Defendants had satisfied their burden with respect to any essential
element of the SECs claims, the SECs response would have been completely
inadequate to prevent summary judgment. See id.
CARL J. BARBIER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
10