UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Administrative Proceedings Rulings

Release No. 6862 / August 4, 2022

Administrative Proceeding

File No. 3-20898

In the Matter of

Petroteq Energy, Inc., and

Aleksandr Blyumkin

Scheduling Order and 

Proceeding Guidelines

The parties submitted a joint scheduling proposal. I adopt the parties’ 

joint proposals, resolve the disputed issue, and order the following schedule:

November 18, 2022: Expert witness disclosures and reports, if any, are 

due.

December 16, 2022: Close of fact and expert discovery.

January 13, 2023: Motions for summary disposition are due.

February 3, 2023: Opposition briefs are due.

February 10, 2023: Reply briefs are due.

March 7, 2023: Parties to exchange pre-marked exhibits and file 

witness lists and exhibit lists.

March 21, 2023: Prehearing briefs, motions in limine, evidentiary

stipulations, and requests for official notice are due.

March 28, 2023: Telephonic prehearing conference. I direct the 

Division of Enforcement to circulate the dial-in 

number to all parties and to my office (alj@sec.gov) at 
2

least one week before the conference and to arrange 

for a court reporter.

April 4, 2023: Hearing commences by remote means or in a location 

to be determined.

Proceeding Guidelines

I will follow the general guidelines described below during these 

proceedings. The parties should review what follows and promptly raise any 

objections they may have to these guidelines.

1. Subpoenas. A party’s motion to quash a subpoena will be due within 

five business days of the submission of the subpoena for signing. Any 

opposition to the motion to quash will be due within five business days 

thereafter. A party moving to quash a subpoena duces tecum based on a 

claim of privilege must support its motion with a declaration and 

privilege log.1

2. Discovery Disputes.

a. Before asking me to resolve a dispute, the parties should try in good 

faith to resolve it through a phone, video, or in-person discussion. 

The exchange of emails does not constitute a good faith effort to 

resolve a discovery dispute.

b. If the parties cannot resolve the dispute, they should email my office 

at alj@sec.gov. The email should attach a one-page document 

explaining the dispute. The document should not include argument 

or precedent. In the email, the parties must certify that they have 

tried in good faith to resolve the dispute. The email should confirm 

when both parties’ counsel are available over the next 3 business 

days; my office will try to set up a video or phone conference to 

attempt to resolve the dispute.

c. If the conference doesn’t resolve the issue, written motions will 

follow.

 

1 See Dorf & Stanton Commc’ns, Inc. v. Molson Breweries, 100 F.3d 919, 923 

(Fed. Cir. 1996); Caudle v. District of Columbia, 263 F.R.D. 29, 35 (D.D.C. 

2009).
3

d. If the dispute is about a deposition, email my office and if I am 

available, we will promptly try to resolve the matter on the phone.

3. Motions for summary disposition. A motion for summary disposition 

must include legal analysis and evidentiary support for the allegations 

and requested relief in accordance with Rapoport v. SEC2 and Ross 

Mandell.

3

a. A motion for summary disposition must be accompanied by a 

statement of material facts as to which the moving party contends 

there is no genuine issue. The statement should consist of short 

numbered paragraphs, each of which must include citations to 

supporting evidence. I may disregard a factual assertion that fails 

to cite supporting evidence, even if the opposing party fails to 

controvert it. 

b. An opposition to such a motion must be accompanied by a separate 

responsive statement of material facts. The responsive statement 

should address each numbered paragraph in the moving party’s 

statement, by including citations to evidence establishing the

existence of a genuine issue necessary to be litigated or agreeing 

that the asserted fact is undisputed. The responsive statement may 

contain, in addition, short numbered paragraphs as to which the 

opposing party contends there is no genuine issue. These additional 

paragraphs must also be supported by citations to evidence and 

should continue the numbered list started by the moving party. 

c. The moving party may file a reply statement that addresses the 

opposing party’s statement, with citations to evidence as 

appropriate. Each point in the reply statement should include the 

text of the numbered paragraph from the filing to which it responds. 

d. Each such motion, opposition, and reply should cite to the 

appropriate paragraphs of a statement of material facts rather than 

to the record. The motion, opposition, and reply—not the respective 

statements of material facts—are where parties should make their 

legal arguments and cite to applicable legal authority. The 

 

2 682 F.3d 98, 108 (D.C. Cir. 2012).

3 Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Release No. 71668, 2014 WL 907416, at 

*2 (Mar. 7, 2014), vacated in part on other grounds, Exchange Act Release 

No. 77935, 2016 WL 3030883 (May 26, 2016).
4

memorandum of points and authorities required by Rule 154(a) 

need not be a separate document from the motion.

e. If the opposing party fails to controvert any fact asserted by the 

moving party in its statement of material facts (or the moving party 

fails to controvert any fact asserted by the opposing party in its 

responsive statement of additional material facts), I may deem such 

fact admitted in deciding the motion. 

4. Exhibits. The parties should confer and attempt to stipulate to the 

admissibility of exhibits. To avoid duplication of exhibits, the parties 

should identify joint exhibits. Exhibits are not filed with the Office of 

the Secretary until the close of the hearing at my instruction.

5. Exhibit lists. A comprehensive exhibit list prevents a party opponent

from being surprised in the middle of the hearing. Exhibit lists shall be 

exchanged among the parties and should include all documents that a 

party expects to use in the hearing for any purpose. This includes 

documents that are relevant only for impeachment purposes or which 

are presumptively inadmissible. Each party should serve its opponent 

with any amendments to its exhibit list. Because I rely on the parties’ 

exhibit lists, the parties should provide me with a paper copy of their 

final exhibit lists at the beginning of the hearing. There is no need to 

submit exhibit lists to my office before the hearing. Following the 

hearing, I will issue a separate order directing the parties to file a list of 

all exhibits, admitted and offered but not admitted, together with 

citations to the record indicating when each exhibit was admitted.

6. Hearing schedule. The first day of the proceeding will begin at 9:30 

a.m. Unless circumstances require a different schedule, we will begin 

each subsequent day at 9:00 a.m. Each day of the proceeding should last 

until at least 5:00 p.m. I generally take one break in the morning, lasting 

about fifteen minutes, and at least one break in the afternoon. I 

generally break for lunch between noon and 12:30 p.m., for about one 

hour.

7. Hearing issues – Examination.

a. In general, the Division of Enforcement presents its case first 

because it has the burden of proof. Respondent then presents its

case. If necessary, the parties may agree to proceed in some other 

order and may take witnesses out of order.

b. If the Division calls a non-party witness that Respondent also 

wishes to call as a witness, Respondent should cross-examine the 
5

witness as if it were calling the witness in its own case. This means 

that Respondent’s cross-examination of the witness in this 

circumstance may exceed the scope of what was covered by the 

Division’s direct examination of that same witness. This will avoid 

the need to recall a witness just so the witness can testify for 

Respondent’s case.

c. In general, cross-examination may be conducted by leading 

questions, even as to Division witnesses that Respondent wishes to 

call in its own case. Except that if Respondent’s officers are called 

as witnesses in the Division’s case, Respondent’s counsel may not 

ask leading questions on cross-examination. Similarly, if a 

Commission employee is called as a witness for Respondent, the 

Division may not ask leading questions on cross-examination.

d. Avoid leading questions on direct examination. Leading questions 

during direct examination of a non-hostile witness are 

objectionable. Repeatedly having to rephrase leading questions 

slows down the hearing.

8. Filings. Posthearing briefs are limited to 12,000 words.4 Parties may 

seek leave to exceed this limit through a motion filed seven days before

the relevant briefing deadline. To enhance the readability of pleadings, 

I urge counsel to limit the use of acronyms to those that are widely 

known.5 For the same reason, I ask that counsel use the same font size 

in footnotes as that used in the body of a pleading.

 

/s/ James E. Grimes 

Chief Administrative Law Judge

 

4 Cf. 17 C.F.R. § 201.450(c) (imposing a word-limit for briefs filed before the 

Commission).

5 See Del. Riverkeeper Network v. FERC, 753 F.3d 1304, 1320–21 (D.C. Cir. 

2014) (Silberman, J., concurring).