SEC v. Mark E. Burns (price manipulation, 2019)
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.
In 2019, the Securities and Exchange Commission obtained a judgment against Mark E. Burns, alleging conduct this library classifies as edgar filing fraud, price manipulation and sham tender offers. The release records a civil penalty of $60,000, disgorgement of $13,886. A parallel criminal matter is referenced in the release.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-24557 |
| Date filed | 2019-08-12 |
| Date resolved | 2019-08-12 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York |
| Status | judgment |
| Asset class | options |
| Criminal parallel | Yes: sentenced (Murray, Burns's co-conspirator (prison term, length not stated)) |
| Defendants | Mark E. Burns |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Exchange Act s.10(b) and Rule 10b-5 ; Exchange Act s.14(e) and Rule 14e-3 ; Securities Act s.17(a) |
| Techniques | EDGAR filing fraud , Price manipulation , Sham tender offers |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- $60k
- Disgorgement
- $13.9k
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- $73.9k
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on August 12, 2019 as release LR-24557. The respondents named are Mark E. Burns (1 individual, 0 entities). The action was brought in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York.
This library tags the matter as edgar filing fraud, price manipulation and sham tender offers, 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 options.
The relief recorded in our data is a civil monetary penalty of $60,000, disgorgement of $13,886. Penalty and disgorgement are distinct: disgorgement returns the gain, while the penalty is punitive. We store them separately so that aggregate figures across the library are not double-counted.
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.
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 3 techniques 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.
- EDGAR filing fraud — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
- Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
- Sham tender offers — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2019-08-12 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.
Same matter
The library links these 5 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.
| Date filed | Agency | Record | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-05-19 | SEC | SEC v. Robert W. Murray (price manipulation, 2017) | Settled |
| 2017-11-09 | SEC | SEC v. Robert W. Murray (sham tender offers, 2017) | Settled |
| 2018-03-22 | SEC | SEC v. Robert W. Murray (sham tender offers, 2018) | Settled |
| 2018-07-17 | SEC | SEC v. Mark E. Burns, Robert W. Murray (price manipulation, 2018) | Settled |
| 2019-08-12 | SEC | SEC v. Mark E. Burns (price manipulation, 2019) | Judgment entered |
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Lee Simmons (price manipulation, 2022) | SEC | 2022-08-19 | EDGAR Filing Fraud , Price Manipulation +1 | $223k | judgment |
| SEC v. Mark E. Burns, Robert W. Murray (price manipulation, 2018) | SEC | 2018-07-17 | EDGAR Filing Fraud , Price Manipulation +1 | — | settled |
| SEC v. Robert W. Murray (price manipulation, 2017) | SEC | 2017-05-19 | EDGAR Filing Fraud , Price Manipulation +1 | — | settled |
| SEC v. PTG Capital Partners, Ltd. (sham tender offers, 2020) | SEC | 2020-03-11 | EDGAR Filing Fraud , Sham Tender Offers | $1.5m | judgment |
| SEC v. Nauman A. Aly (sham tender offers, 2018) | SEC | 2018-03-28 | EDGAR Filing Fraud , Sham Tender Offers | — | judgment |
| SEC v. Robert W. Murray (sham tender offers, 2018) | SEC | 2018-03-22 | EDGAR Filing Fraud , Sham Tender Offers | — | settled |