SEC v. Yu-Cheng Lin (a.k.a. Believe Lin) (insider trading, 2017)

Judgment entered

✓ 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-yu-cheng-lin-a-k-a-believe-lin-insider-trading-2017) by email

The SEC alleged in February 2017 that Yu-Cheng Lin traded ahead of Ubiquiti Networks earnings announcements in 2016. On June 12, 2017 the District of New Jersey entered a judgment against him that enjoins him from violating Section 10(b) and orders roughly $1.8 million in disgorgement, $44,000 in interest and $5.4 million in penalties.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$5.4m

Disgorgement

$1.8m

Prejudgment interest

$44k

Total relief

$7.2m

Alleged gain

$1.6m

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 February 13, 2017 as release LR-23748. The respondents named are Yu-Cheng Lin (a.k.a. Believe Lin) (1 individual, 0 entities). The action was brought in the U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey.

This library tags the matter as insider trading, 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 and options.

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.

Outcome. A second SEC release, dated June 19, 2017, reports that the District of New Jersey entered a judgment against Lin on June 12, 2017. It permanently enjoins him from violating Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 and orders him to pay about $1.8 million in disgorgement, about $44,000 in prejudgment interest and about $5.4 million as a civil penalty, roughly $7.3 million in all. The release gives these figures only as approximations; they are recorded here rounded. It does not describe a criminal case and does not say whether the amounts were collected. Facts about Lin's conduct remain the SEC's allegations; the release reports the judgment and not a trial finding. 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.

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

Timeline

1. 2017-02-13 Litigation release published
2. 2017-06-12 Court entered judgment against Yu-Cheng Lin (injunction, disgorgement, interest, penalty)

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
• SEC litigation release on the judgment (LR-23862)

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.

Same matter

The library links these 2 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.

This grouping is the library's, made by matching names, techniques, dates and citations when the site is built. It is not the regulator's or a court's determination that the records are one case, and it errs towards missing a link rather than making a false one.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.