SEC v. Amir Waldman, et al. (insider trading, 2020)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 3, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (sec-amir-waldman-et-al-insider-trading-2020) by email

In April 2020 the SEC announced a final consent judgment against Amir Waldman, the last defendant in a case over trading in Mobileye ahead of Intel's tender offer. He was ordered to pay disgorgement of $1,078,300, interest of $40,889 and a penalty of $1,078,300.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$1.1m

Disgorgement

$1.1m

Prejudgment interest

$40.9k

Total relief

$2.2m

Alleged gain

—

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced the judgment on April 17, 2020 as litigation release 24799; the court entered it that day in the Southern District of New York.

The amended complaint alleged Mobileye's founders passed information about Intel's tender offer to James Shaoul, who passed it to his friend Waldman; Waldman allegedly profited by more than $4.5 million. The judgment enjoins him under Section 14(e) and Rule 14e-3.

Four other defendants had already been dealt with, so the release says the SEC's litigation has concluded. The earlier record named the defendant 'Amir Waldman, et al.' and showed no money.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Insider trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2020-04-17 Litigation release published

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• SEC litigation release

The linked release is a work of the United States government and is not subject to copyright. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Same matter

The library links these 3 records because they appear to concern one matter: the same lead defendant, an overlapping technique tag and close filing dates, or a shared court docket or a release that cites the other. Records are listed by date filed.

This grouping is the library's, made by matching names, techniques, dates and citations when the site is built. It is not the regulator's or a court's determination that the records are one case, and it errs towards missing a link rather than making a false one.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.