SEC v. Gabriel Rebeiz (insider trading, 2025)

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-gabriel-rebeiz-insider-trading-2025) by email

In January 2025 the Securities and Exchange Commission filed settled charges against Gabriel Rebeiz, an electrical engineering professor on Resonant's Technical Advisory Committee, over his purchase of 120,000 Resonant shares ahead of the February 14, 2022 announcement that a Murata subsidiary would acquire it, for alleged profits of $360,673. Without admitting or denying, he consented, subject to court approval, to an injunction, $360,673 in disgorgement, $65,560.25 in interest, an equal penalty and a five-year officer and director bar.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$361k

Disgorgement

$361k

Prejudgment interest

$65.6k

Total relief

$787k

Alleged gain

$361k

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 January 22, 2025 as release LR-26231, filing in the Southern District of California on January 21, 2025.

The complaint alleges that after encouraging a sale of the company, Rebeiz called a Resonant executive on January 19, 2022, took the executive's statement as a sign of an impending acquisition, and began buying the next day. The stock rose 257 percent on the announcement.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2025-01-22 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
• SEC Complaint

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.