SEC v. Discala et al. (price manipulation, 2023)
Judgment entered
Machine-extracted, pending human review. The structured fields on this page were parsed automatically from the regulator's own release, linked below. Read the primary document before relying on any figure here, and tell us if something is wrong.
In 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission obtained a judgment against Discala et al., alleging conduct this library classifies as price manipulation. The release records disgorgement of $552,725. A parallel criminal matter is referenced in the release.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-25725 |
| Date filed | 2023-05-12 |
| Date resolved | 2023-05-12 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York |
| Status | judgment |
| Asset class | equities |
| Criminal parallel | Yes |
| Bars imposed | penny stock bar |
| Defendants | Discala et al. |
| Techniques | Price manipulation |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- $553k
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- $553k
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on May 12, 2023 as release LR-25725. The respondents named are Discala et al. (1 individual, 0 entities). The action was brought in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York.
This library tags the matter as price manipulation, 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.
The relief recorded in our data is disgorgement of $552,725. Penalty and disgorgement are distinct: disgorgement returns the gain, while the penalty is punitive. We store them separately so that aggregate figures across the library are not double-counted.
Non-monetary relief recorded: 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.
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.
- Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2023-05-12 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CFTC v. George Santos (price manipulation, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-07-31 | Price Manipulation | $35k | judgment |
| CFTC v. Swiss Energy Trader (price manipulation, 2024) | CFTC | 2024-08-27 | Price Manipulation | $48m | judgment |
| CFTC v. Trafigura (insider trading, 2024) | CFTC | 2024-06-17 | Insider Trading , Price Manipulation | $55m | judgment |
| SEC v. Ronald Heineman (price manipulation, 2024) | SEC | 2024-04-03 | Price Manipulation | — | judgment |
| SEC v. Marc E. Wexler (price manipulation, 2023) | SEC | 2023-12-05 | Price Manipulation , Pump And Dump | — | judgment |
| CFTC v. HSBC Bank USA (cash vs derivatives schemes, 2023) | CFTC | 2023-11-07 | Cash Vs Derivatives Schemes , Insider Trading +2 | $1.7bn | filed |