Enforcement Actions
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)
NOTE: Stipulations of Fact and Consent to Penalty (SFC); Offers of Settlement (OS); and Letters of Acceptance Waiver, and Consent (AWC) are entered into by Respondents without admitting or denying the allegations, but consent is given to the described sanctions & to the entry of findings. Additionally, for AWCs, if FINRA has reason to believe a violation has occurred and the member or associated person does not dispute the violation, FINRA may prepare and request that the member or associated person execute a letter accepting a finding of violation, consenting to the imposition of sanctions, and agreeing to waive such member's or associated person's right to a hearing before a hearing panel, and any right of appeal to the National Adjudicatory Council, the SEC, and the courts, or to otherwise challenge the validity of the letter, if the letter is accepted. The letter shall describe the act or practice engaged in or omitted, the rule, regulation, or statutory provision violated, and the sanction or sanctions to be imposed.
December 2009
Martin Dennis Ross
OS/2007008732902/December 2009
Ross willfully engaged in pre-arranged or other manipulative trades primarily for a barred individual’s benefit. Ross traded shares of the security on one side of the market with one firm and then traded almost the same number of shares on the opposite side of the market with another firm. There were numerous calls between the individual and Ross within two minutes either immediately before or immediately after Ross affected the inside market. The trading created the false appearance of trading volume and market interest in the company and allowed Ross and the individual to artificially affect the security’s market price.
Martin Dennis Ross: Fined $25,000; Suspended 2 years
Tags:  Pre-arranged Trading     |    In: Cases of Note : FINRA
Bill Singer's Comment
Ohhh, how this type of case description drives me up the wall!  Why mention that the trading was done for a "barred" individual is you're not going to name that person?  What is the relevancy of noting that fact if that barred person did not have beneficial interest in the account traded -- which isn't explained.  If the barred party had some important relationship to the issuer, stock, or accounts, why not tell us?  Haven't we learned anything post-Madoff?
Enforcement Actions