SEC v. Asher Z. Zwebner, Luke C. Zouvas and others (pump and dump, 2016)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 4, 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-asher-z-zwebner-pump-and-dump-2016) by email

In April 2016 the SEC filed two actions over the Crown Dynamics shell: one against accountant Asher Zwebner, and one against promoter Christopher Larson, lawyer Luke Zouvas and others. Zwebner took a default judgment in November 2016, and the SEC reported in July 2020 that consent judgments entered on June 1, 2020 concluded the litigation against the remaining defendants.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$150k

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

$150k

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 this matter on April 26, 2016 as release LR-23526. The respondents named are Asher Z. Zwebner, Luke C. Zouvas, Cameron F. Robb, Christopher D. Larson, Jason M. Schiprett and Robert D. Jorgenson (6 individuals, 0 entities). The action was brought in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of California.

One complaint alleges that an Israeli accountant secretly controlled a shell's registered IPO using nominees and sold it to a promoter. The second alleges the promoter and four others paid $400,000 for a call centre, placed manipulative trades and issued misleading press releases, then sold through nominees. Both complaints charge Section 17(a) and Rule 10b-5; neither charges Section 17(b) or alleges that promotion was paid for without disclosure, so the paid-promotion tag has been replaced with shell factories.

This library tags the matter as pump and dump and shell factories, based on the conduct the regulator describes. Each tag links to a page explaining how that technique works, what statute it engages, and what penalties comparable actions have attracted. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

The conduct is recorded against equities, with OTC identified in the release.

Non-monetary relief recorded: officer-and-director bar, penny stock bar.

The release references a parallel criminal proceeding. Where a criminal case exists, the civil and criminal outcomes are recorded separately, because they resolve on different standards of proof.

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.

Two documents show the outcome. In the Zwebner action, a clerk's default judgment of November 29, 2016 in the Southern District of California granted the SEC's motion, enjoined Zwebner from the antifraud provisions and barred him from penny-stock offerings and from serving as an officer or director; it orders disgorgement, interest and a penalty without stating amounts, so the amounts are unknown. In the second action, SEC release 24851 reports that on June 1, 2020 the District of Arizona entered consent judgments against Zouvas, Larson and Robb. Larson and Robb were ordered to pay $320,672 in disgorgement and interest jointly and $75,000 each in penalties, with five-year conduct injunctions and officer-and-director bars; Zouvas, after an earlier summary judgment ruling on one charge, consented to a judgment with $94,469 in disgorgement and interest, no penalty and a penny-stock bar. Judgments against Schiprett and Jorgenson were also entered, concluding that litigation. The penalty field adds the two $75,000 penalties; disgorgement and interest are reported only as combined sums and are left out of the fields. Those who consented did not admit or deny the allegations. Checked on 2026-10-04.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with 2 techniques 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.

• Pump and dump — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
• Shell factories — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2016-04-26 Litigation release published
2. 2016-11-29 Clerk's default judgment against Zwebner (S.D. Cal.)
3. 2020-06-01 Consent final judgments against Zouvas, Larson and Robb; litigation concluded (SEC LR-24851)

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
• Default judgment against Zwebner (Nov. 29, 2016)
• SEC litigation release 24851 (consent judgments)

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.

Related actions

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

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.