SEC v. Patrick O. Howard and Optimal Economics Capital Partners (ponzi schemes, 2017)

Settled

✓ 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-patrick-o-howard-et-al-ponzi-schemes-2017) by email

The SEC sued Patrick O. Howard and two Dallas companies in February 2017 over three private funds. Howard consented to a judgment entered March 7, 2017, and on July 13, 2022 the court entered a final judgment against him for $2,236,870 in disgorgement and $603,323.51 in interest, deemed satisfied by a criminal restitution order.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

$2.2m

Prejudgment interest

$603k

Total relief

$2.8m

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 complaint, filed under seal on February 14, 2017, alleges returns of 12 to 20 percent were promised and backed by insurance, only $7.5 million was used to acquire revenue streams, and false account statements were sent. Optimal Economics allegedly used new investor funds for Ponzi-like payments to earlier investors, and Howard falsely claimed to be a registered investment adviser.

A temporary restraining order and receiver were obtained; the allegations are unproven. The record had the status unknown and a name ending in "et al."

This library tags the matter as ponzi schemes because the document describes payments to earlier participants made from later participants' money. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

Outcome. The court's final judgment as to Howard says he consented to an agreed judgment, entered March 7, 2017, that left the amounts of monetary relief for later. After the SEC moved for remedies in June 2022, the court entered a final judgment on July 13, 2022 ordering disgorgement of $2,236,870 plus prejudgment interest of $603,323.51, a total of $2,840,193.51, and said the obligation is deemed satisfied by the restitution order in United States v. Howard, No. 3:18-cr-00319-B (N.D. Tex.). No civil penalty is stated in this document. The judgment does not give the criminal sentence, so none is recorded. This outcome covers Howard only; I did not open any document showing how the two companies, Optimal Economics Capital Partners and Howard Capital Holdings, were finally resolved. Checked on 2026-10-04.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2017-02-16 Litigation release published
2. 2022-07-13 Final judgment against Patrick O. Howard (disgorgement and interest, deemed satisfied by criminal restitution)

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
• Final judgment as to Patrick O. Howard

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.