SEC v. Jason Hershberger (boiler rooms, 2017)
Alleged — pending
These are allegations. SEC has filed an action; nothing in it has been proven, and the respondents have not been found liable. Everything described on this page is what the regulator alleges, not what a court has found. See our editorial policy.
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 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought an action against Jason Hershberger, alleging conduct this library classifies as boiler rooms. No monetary relief has been recorded at this stage; the matter is an allegation and remains unproven. A parallel criminal matter is referenced in the release.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | 34-81466 |
| Date filed | 2017-08-23 |
| Status | filed |
| Asset class | bonds, equities |
| Criminal parallel | Yes |
| Bars imposed | registration bar |
| Defendants | Jason Hershberger |
| Techniques | Boiler rooms |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on August 23, 2017 as release 34-81466. The respondents named are Jason Hershberger (1 individual, 0 entities).
This library tags the matter as boiler rooms, 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 bonds and equities.
Non-monetary relief recorded: registration 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.
This matter is at the allegation stage. Nothing in the regulator's filing has been proven, and the respondents are entitled to the presumption that it has not been. This page will be updated if the matter is resolved, dismissed or withdrawn.
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.
- Boiler rooms — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Andrew Spaventa and others (boiler rooms, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-17 | Boiler Rooms | — | filed |
| SEC v. unnamed respondents (boiler rooms, 2024) | SEC | 2024-11-20 | Boiler Rooms | — | dismissed |
| SEC v. Anthony Guarino (boiler rooms, 2024) | SEC | 2024-09-12 | Boiler Rooms | — | settled |
| SEC v. Mario Gogliormella, Steven Lacaj, and Karim Ibrahim a/k/a/ Chris Hayes (boiler rooms, 2024) | SEC | 2024-06-12 | Boiler Rooms | — | filed |
| SEC v. James P. Anglim (boiler rooms, 2023) | SEC | 2023-07-17 | Boiler Rooms | — | judgment |
| SEC v. Legend Venture Partners LLC (boiler rooms, 2023) | SEC | 2023-07-11 | Boiler Rooms | — | filed |