|
|
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. NOVUS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff,
v.
NOVUS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, a Utah limited liability company, RALPH W. THOMPSON, JR., DUANE C. JOHNSON, RCH2, LLC, A Utah Limited liability company, ROBERT CASEY HALL and ERIC J. WHEELER Defendants, and
U.S. VENTURES, LC, a Utah limited liability company, U.S. VENTURES INTERNATIONAL, LLC, a Utah limited liability company, ROBERT L. HOLLOWAY, ONLINE STRATEGIES GROUP, INC., a Delaware Corporation, and DAVID STORY Relief Defendants.
Civil No. 2:07CV00235.
United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division.
December 8, 2010.
FINAL JUDGMENT OF DISGORGEMENT, PREJUDGMENT INTEREST AND CIVIL PENALTY AGAINST DEFENDANT ROBERT CASEY HALLTENA CAMPBELL, Chief District Judge. Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission") has filed a Motion for Disgorgement, Prejudgment Interest and Civil Penalty against Robert Casey Hall. The Court has already entered an Order Imposing Injunctive Relief and Staying Motion for Contempt Against Defendant Robert Casey Hall on July 2, 2007. (Docket No. 115.) The Commission seeks relief to recover some of the millions of dollars misappropriated by Defendant Robert Casey Hall ("Hall"). Hall has filed no responsive pleadings.1 Having reviewed the Commission's Motion, its Memorandum and exhibits thereto, and having heard this cause on September 30, 2010,2 the Court finds as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT1. Robert Casey Hall ("Hall") is a Utah resident. Hall was a member and registered agent for RCH2, LLC. Hall solicited investors on behalf of RCH2. 2. RCH2, LLC ("RCH2") was a Utah limited liability company. RCH2 had its principal place of business at 14032 Canyon Vista Lane, Draper, Utah. RCH2 claimed to be engaged in activities related to real estate investments. 3. U.S. Ventures, LLC ("U.S. Ventures") was a Utah limited liability company with its principal place of business at 3899 East Parkview Drive, Salt Lake City, Utah. U.S. Ventures purported to be in the business of generating profits through investment in the futures market. U.S. Ventures received investor funds from Hall.
1. After the hearing, Mr. Hall filed a pro se "objection" (see Docket No. 674) contending, without evidentiary support, that he had no notice of the hearing, that he did not violate the asset-freeze order, and that he did not have the money the SEC sought. His arguments are not only late but unpersuasive. (See also Pl.'s Mem. Opp'n to Hall Objection (Docket No. 674).) 2. Mr. Hall did not appear at the hearing despite proper notice. 3. See Errata filed by SEC (Docket No. 697).
|
|