SEC v. Ryan Gilbertson, et al. (reverse merger schemes, 2017)
Judgment entered
Machine-extracted, pending human review. The structured fields on this page were parsed automatically from the regulator's own release, linked below. Read the primary document before relying on any figure here, and tell us if something is wrong.
In 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission obtained a judgment against Ryan Gilbertson, et al., alleging conduct this library classifies as reverse merger schemes. The release records disgorgement of $75,000, prejudgment interest of $11,075. A parallel criminal matter is referenced in the release.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-23804 |
| Date filed | 2017-04-13 |
| Date resolved | 2017-04-13 |
| Status | judgment |
| Asset class | equities |
| Criminal parallel | Yes |
| Bars imposed | registration bar |
| Defendants | Ryan Gilbertson, et al. |
| Techniques | Reverse merger schemes |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- $75k
- Prejudgment interest
- $11.1k
- Total relief
- $86.1k
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on April 13, 2017 as release LR-23804. The respondents named are Ryan Gilbertson, et al. (1 individual, 0 entities).
This library tags the matter as reverse merger schemes, 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.
The relief recorded in our data is disgorgement of $75,000, prejudgment interest of $11,075. 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.
Non-monetary relief recorded: registration 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.
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.
- Reverse merger schemes — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2017-04-13 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.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Morrie Tobin et al. (reverse merger schemes, 2024) | SEC | 2024-10-18 | Reverse Merger Schemes | $230k | judgment |
| SEC v. DiScala et al., (pump and dump, 2024) | SEC | 2024-09-20 | Pump And Dump , Reverse Merger Schemes | — | judgment |
| SEC v. Keith D. Beekmeyer and Andrew M. Bye (reverse merger schemes, 2024) | SEC | 2024-09-20 | Reverse Merger Schemes | — | settled |
| SEC v. Esmark Inc. and James P. Bouchard (reverse merger schemes, 2024) | SEC | 2024-09-06 | Reverse Merger Schemes | — | settled |
| SEC v. Meta Materials, Inc. ( and others (engineered short squeeze, 2024) | SEC | 2024-06-25 | Engineered Short Squeeze , Paid Stock Promotion +1 | $1m | settled |
| SEC v. Janusz (John) Zukowski and Jerry Samaras (reverse merger schemes, 2024) | SEC | 2024-06-13 | Reverse Merger Schemes | — | settled |