SEC v. Esos Rings, Inc. and Michelle Silverstein aka Michelle Silverstein Bisnoff (ponzi schemes, 2023)

Settled

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 3, 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-esos-rings-inc-ponzi-schemes-2023) by email

In September 2023 the SEC announced a settlement with Esos Rings, Inc. and Michelle Silverstein aka Michelle Silverstein Bisnoff. The SEC filed a settled complaint alleging that Esos Rings and its principal raised $1.95 million from investors with false statements about patents and an Apple acquisition and operated a Ponzi-like scheme using new money to pay earlier investors. Judgments, subject to court approval, would make both liable for $566,483 in disgorgement and $46,836 in interest; the $233,229 penalty and officer-and-director bar apply to Silverstein alone.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$233k

Disgorgement

$566k

Prejudgment interest

$46.8k

Total relief

$847k

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 September 12, 2023 as release LR-25826. The SEC filed a settled complaint alleging that Esos Rings and its principal raised $1.95 million from investors with false statements about patents and an Apple acquisition and operated a Ponzi-like scheme using new money to pay earlier investors. Judgments, subject to court approval, would make both liable for $566,483 in disgorgement and $46,836 in interest; the $233,229 penalty and officer-and-director bar apply to Silverstein alone.

This library tags the matter as a Ponzi scheme because the document describes returns to earlier investors paid from later investors' money, as alleged or found. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

The relief recorded in our data is a civil penalty of $233,229, disgorgement of $566,483, prejudgment interest of $46,836, as the release or order states it. 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: officer-and-director bar.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2023-09-12 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.

• SEC litigation release

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.