SEC v. Laksha Bohra, Viky Bohra, and Gotham Bohra (insider trading, 2020)
Judgment entered
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.
In September 2020 the SEC charged a former Amazon finance manager, her husband and his father with trading ahead of Amazon earnings announcements between 2016 and 2018 for about $1.4 million. All three consented to judgments totalling $1,428,094 disgorgement, $118,406 interest and $1,106,399 penalties.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-24923 |
| Date filed | 2020-09-28 |
| Date resolved | 2020-09-28 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington |
| Status | judgment |
| Criminal parallel | Yes: charged (Viky Bohra), Western District of Washington |
| Defendants | Laksha Bohra ; Viky Bohra ; Gotham Bohra |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 |
| Techniques | Insider trading |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- $1.1m
- Disgorgement
- $1.4m
- Prejudgment interest
- $118k
- Total relief
- $2.7m
- Alleged gain
- $1.4m
What is alleged to have happened
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced the settled complaint on September 28, 2020 as litigation release 24923, filed in the Western District of Washington.
The complaint alleges Laksha Bohra, a senior manager in Amazon's tax department, obtained confidential earnings information and tipped her husband Viky, and that Viky and his father Gotham traded in eleven accounts held by family members. It also says she ignored quarterly reminders not to pass on such information.
The three consented to injunctions and the totals above; the criminal case was against Viky Bohra. The earlier record split the names incorrectly and omitted the penalties.
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
- 2020-09-28 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Trijya Vakil and Neeraj Visen (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-09-04 | Insider Trading | $109k | settled |
| CFTC v. Gabriel Perez (insider trading, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-08-28 | Insider Trading | $65k | judgment |
| SEC v. Gavin Wolfe and others (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-21 | Insider Trading | — | filed |
| SEC v. Jesse R. Mitchell (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-21 | Insider Trading | — | filed |
| SEBI v. Arun Kumar Somani and others (insider trading review, Indian Oil Corporation, 2026) | SEBI (India) | 2026-08-13 | Insider Trading | — | dismissed |
| SEC v. Benjamin Tesfaye (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-11 | Insider Trading | $18.7k | settled |