SEC v. Mark A. Miller, Saeid Jaberian and Christopher J. Rajkaran (pump and dump, 2021)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 4, 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-miller-saeid-jaberian-pump-and-dump-2021) by email

In November 2021 the SEC added Saeid Jaberian and Christopher Rajkaran to its pump-and-dump case against Mark Miller in Minnesota. By January 26, 2026 judgments had been entered against all three, with combined disgorgement of $260,757 plus $30,107 interest, injunctions and penny stock and officer-and-director bars.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

$261k

Prejudgment interest

$30.1k

Total relief

$291k

Alleged gain

$240k

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 November 1, 2021 as release LR-25253. The respondents named are Mark A. Miller, Saeid Jaberian and Christopher J. Rajkaran (3 individuals, 0 entities).

This library tags the matter as pump and dump, 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 equities.

Non-monetary relief recorded: penny stock 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.

Outcome: SEC release LR-26467 (January 27, 2026) says the SEC's action is fully resolved. Rajkaran: default judgment on December 5, 2024 with disgorgement of $68,001 plus $10,223 interest ($53,487 deemed satisfied by his criminal forfeiture). Miller: judgment on February 12, 2025 with $126,007 disgorgement plus $9,536 interest ($38,292 deemed satisfied by forfeiture). Jaberian: injunctions and bars entered April 9, 2025 on partial summary judgment (LR-26288, based on his guilty plea), then a final consent judgment on January 26, 2026 with $66,749 disgorgement plus $10,348 interest. No civil penalties are reported. Money fields here are the sums of those figures, before the satisfied portions. In the criminal case Jaberian received two years' probation, Rajkaran 18 months and Miller 12 months and a day. This record and the record for LR-25118 describe the same case, No. 21-cv-01445.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2021-11-01 Litigation release published
2. 2025-04-09 Partial summary judgment against Jaberian: injunction and bars (LR-26288)
3. 2026-01-26 Final consent judgment as to Jaberian; SEC reports case fully resolved (LR-26467)

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 litigation release LR-26288 (Jaberian partial summary judgment)
• SEC litigation release LR-26467 (case fully resolved)

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.

Same matter

The library links these 4 records because they appear to concern one matter: the same lead defendant, an overlapping technique tag and close filing dates, or a shared court docket or a release that cites the other. Records are listed by date filed.

This grouping is the library's, made by matching names, techniques, dates and citations when the site is built. It is not the regulator's or a court's determination that the records are one case, and it errs towards missing a link rather than making a false one.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.