SEC v. Christopher Clark and William Wright (insider trading, 2020)

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-christopher-clark-insider-trading-2020) by email

In December 2020 the SEC sued Christopher Clark and William Wright over insider trading. Wright consented to a final judgment on 18 October 2021 and Clark on 22 December 2023, each with an injunction and a US$240,934 civil penalty, and Wright with a two-year officer-and-director bar.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$482k

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

$482k

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 December 11, 2020 as release LR-24982. The respondents named are Christopher Clark and William Wright (2 individuals, 0 entities).

This library tags the matter as insider trading, 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 options.

Outcome. The Eastern District of Virginia entered consent final judgments against both defendants, each without admitting or denying the allegations. Wright's, dated 18 October 2021, enjoins him from violating Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, bars him from serving as an officer or director of certain public issuers for two years and orders a US$240,934 civil penalty. Clark's, dated 22 December 2023, carries the same injunction and a US$240,934 penalty payable in three instalments. The penalty figure recorded is the sum of the two.

The documents opened show no disgorgement, interest or officer bar for Clark. They do not mention a criminal case.

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. 2020-12-11 Litigation release published
2. 2021-10-18 Consent final judgment against William Wright
3. 2023-12-22 Consent final judgment against Christopher Clark

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
• Final judgment as to William Wright (18 October 2021)
• Final judgment as to Christopher Clark (22 December 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.

Related actions

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

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.