SEC v. Carlos Sacanell (insider trading, 2024)
Alleged — pending
These are allegations. SEC has filed an action; nothing in it has been proven, and the respondents have not been found liable. Everything described on this page is what the regulator alleges, not what a court has found. See our editorial policy.
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.
In October 2024 the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Carlos Sacanell of Pennsylvania with buying Oak Street Health stock and call options on confidential information from his partner, a senior Oak Street executive, ahead of CVS Health's acquisition announcement, for alleged profits of about $617,000. The complaint seeks an injunction, disgorgement, a penalty and a bar; criminal charges were filed in parallel.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-26168 |
| Date filed | 2024-10-31 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| Status | filed |
| Asset class | options |
| Criminal parallel | Yes: charged, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 2024-10-31 |
| Defendants | Carlos Sacanell |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 |
| Techniques | Insider trading |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- $617k
What is alleged to have happened
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on October 31, 2024 as release LR-26168, filing in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
The complaint alleges that the executive shared the transaction details in confidence and that Sacanell's position was larger in Oak Street call options than any other retail investor and the fifth largest overall.
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.
Checked on 2026-10-04: no outcome found on SEC pages or the court docket. The docket (E.D. Pa. 2:24-cv-05839) shows that on November 12, 2024 the court let the United States intervene and stayed the civil case, with status reports still being filed through August 24, 2026 and no judgment entered.
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
- 2024-10-31 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.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Trijya Vakil and Neeraj Visen (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-09-04 | Insider Trading | $109k | settled |
| CFTC v. Gabriel Perez (insider trading, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-08-28 | Insider Trading | $65k | judgment |
| SEC v. Gavin Wolfe and others (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-21 | Insider Trading | — | filed |
| SEC v. Jesse R. Mitchell (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-21 | Insider Trading | — | filed |
| SEBI v. Arun Kumar Somani and others (insider trading review, Indian Oil Corporation, 2026) | SEBI (India) | 2026-08-13 | Insider Trading | — | dismissed |
| SEC v. Benjamin Tesfaye (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-11 | Insider Trading | $18.7k | settled |