SEC v. Richard Eden, Christopher Neumann and Dale Pearlman (matched orders, 2019)

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-richard-eden-et-al-matched-orders-2019) by email

In November 2019 the SEC announced settled charges against Richard Eden, Dale Pearlman and Christopher Neumann for cold-calling investors into buying microcap Intertech Solutions at prices and volumes coordinated so an undisclosed control person's sell orders matched, while acting as unregistered brokers. Combined payments total $1,016,372 disgorgement, $83,416 interest and $225,000 in penalties.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$225k

Disgorgement

$1m

Prejudgment interest

$83.4k

Total relief

$1.3m

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 on November 4, 2019 (litigation release 24657) complaints filed in the Central District of California against Eden and Neumann (October 31, 2019) and Pearlman (November 4, 2019).

The SEC alleged that from at least September 2014 Eden and Pearlman phoned investors and persuaded them to buy shares of Intertech Solutions in their own accounts at prices and volumes coordinated with the issuer's undisclosed control person, who entered sell orders at the same price and volume, making it highly likely the orders matched and letting him offload his shares into a ready market. Neumann allegedly helped solicit investors for Eden. The charges are Section 17(a), Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 and Section 5 (Eden and Pearlman) and unregistered-broker violations (all three). The control person and the issuer had been charged earlier.

Without admitting or denying, all three consented to judgments, subject to court approval: Eden $777,272 disgorgement, $55,147 interest and a $125,000 penalty; Pearlman $115,000, $13,393 and $50,000; Neumann $124,100, $14,876 and $50,000. The record shows the totals. It previously showed only Eden's figures and the undisclosed-control tag; the charged conduct is the coordinated matched trading and unregistered brokering, so the tag is now matched orders.

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.

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

Timeline

1. 2019-11-04 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.