SEC v. Charlie Abujudeh (pump and dump, 2021)

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-charlie-abujudeh-pump-and-dump-2021) by email

In July 2021 the SEC sued Charlie Abujudeh over an alleged microcap pump-and-dump scheme. On January 20, 2023 the Eastern District of New York entered a consent final judgment, without admission or denial, ordering $5,423,045 in disgorgement, $115,993 in interest and a $414,366 penalty, with five-year penny stock and officer-and-director bars.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$414k

Disgorgement

$5.4m

Prejudgment interest

$116k

Total relief

$6m

Alleged gain

$9m

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 July 22, 2021 as release LR-25147. The respondents named are Charlie Abujudeh (1 individual, 0 entities). The action was brought in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York.

The complaint alleges that the defendant ran microcap sales schemes through high-pressure calls and email promotions, paid promoters to tout Odyssey Group stock, and secretly sold his shares into the demand those campaigns produced. It charges fraud; it does not charge Section 17(b) or allege that readers were not told the promoters were paid, so the record is tagged pump and dump only.

This library tags the matter as pump and dump, 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.

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

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: SEC release LR-25621 (January 23, 2023) and the final judgment itself (Document 32, filed January 20, 2023) show Abujudeh consented, without admitting or denying the allegations, to a permanent injunction under the antifraud and registration provisions, a five-year penny stock bar and a five-year officer-and-director bar, disgorgement of $5,423,045 with prejudgment interest of $115,993, and a civil penalty of $414,366. The release headline describes it as over $5 million. The allegations in the complaint were not adjudicated.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2021-07-22 Litigation release published
2. 2023-01-20 Consent final judgment entered (E.D.N.Y.), announced in LR-25621

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-25621 (final judgment)
• Final judgment (Doc. 32, Jan. 20, 2023)

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.