SEC v. Oscar Wu (insider trading, 2015)

Settled

✓ 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.

Report an error in this record (sec-oscar-wu-insider-trading-2015) by email

In 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed settled insider trading charges against Oscar Wu, a former portfolio manager accused of trading and tipping relatives on confidential information about Unwired Planet, Inc. The release gives a combined payment of $35,038 for disgorgement, interest and penalties.

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

the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on October 7, 2015 as litigation release 23380. The respondent named is Oscar Wu (1 individual, 0 entities). The SEC alleges that Wu learned confidential information about Unwired Planet's patent revenue-sharing talks with Ericsson through his employer's investment-related agreement with the company, bought Unwired Planet securities in a relative's account and tipped a second relative. Under the settlement, subject to court approval in the Southern District of New York, Wu accepts a permanent antifraud injunction, pays disgorgement, interest and penalties totalling $35,038, and is barred from the securities industry with a right to reapply after five years.

The release does not split the $35,038 among disgorgement, interest and penalty, so the money fields are left empty.

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

1. 2015-10-07 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.