SEC v. Bruce Cameron Conway (insider trading, 2025)

Settled

✓ 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-bruce-cameron-conway-insider-trading-2025) by email

In August 2025 the SEC charged Bruce Cameron Conway over trading in Cancer Genetics shares ahead of a merger announcement. On June 15, 2026 the SEC filed his consent to a final judgment, subject to court approval, with $60,201.95 disgorgement, $19,461.39 interest and a $160,936.22 penalty.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$161k

Disgorgement

$60.2k

Prejudgment interest

$19.5k

Total relief

$241k

Alleged gain

$160k

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 August 11, 2025 as release LR-26370, filing in the Northern District of Texas on August 7, 2025.

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.

Outcome (checked on 2026-10-04): the SEC's litigation release of June 16, 2026 reports that on June 15 the SEC filed a consent and proposed final judgment for Conway. Without admitting the complaint's allegations, he agreed to a permanent injunction against violating Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, and to pay disgorgement of $60,201.95, prejudgment interest of $19,461.39 and a civil penalty of $160,936.22. The release says the judgment is subject to court approval, and we did not open a court record showing when, or whether, the court entered it. The date recorded is therefore the date the consent was filed.

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. 2025-08-11 Litigation release published
2. 2026-06-15 SEC files Conway's consent and proposed final judgment (subject to court approval)

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
• SEC litigation release LR-26568

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 2 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.