SEC v. Mark A. Lefkowitz, et al. (unregistered distributions, 2015)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 2, 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-mark-a-lefkowitz-et-al-unregistered-distributions-2015) by email

In February 2015 a Florida federal court entered final judgments against Unico, Inc., its former CEO Mark A. Lopez and two financiers for illegal unregistered distributions of billions of penny stock shares, with most payments waived.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

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

On February 24, 2015 the SEC announced final judgments entered February 10, 2015 in the Middle District of Florida against Unico, Inc., Mark A. Lopez, Steven R. Peacock and Shane H. Traveller, with a partial judgment against Mark A. Lefkowitz on February 18. The 2012 complaint alleged they misused the Section 3(a)(10) exemption in the unregistered distribution of billions of shares. Unico was ordered to disgorge $9,350,000 plus $2,532,327 interest but payment was waived except $250,000; Peacock was ordered to disgorge $609,763 plus $136,858 interest, waived entirely. The record previously showed Peacock's waived figures as the case's. They are not recorded as headline amounts here because they are individual, and mostly waived.

This library tags the matter as unregistered distributions, based on the conduct the document describes. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2015-02-24 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.