UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 

Release No. 98600 / September 28, 2023

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-20945

In the Matter of

Surgalign Holdings, Inc. and 

Robert P. Jordheim,

Respondents.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

ORDER APPOINTING FUND 

ADMINISTRATOR, SETTING 

ADMINISTRATOR’S BOND 

AMOUNT, AND AUTHORIZING 

PAYMENT OF FEES AND 

EXPENSES

On August 3, 2022, the Commission issued an Order Instituting Public Administrative 

and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections 

4C and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 102(e) of the Commission's Rules 

of Practice, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a Cease-and-Desist Order 

(the “Order”)1against Surgalign Holdings, Inc. (formerly known as RTI Surgical Holdings, Inc. 

and RTI Surgical, Inc.) (“RTI”) and Robert P. Jordheim (“Jordheim”) (collectively, the 

“Respondents”). In the Order, the Commission found that from 2015 through 2019, RTI shipped 

orders weeks or months before its customers had originally requested delivery, thereby pulling 

sales forward from future quarters, to address projected quarterly revenue shortfalls. In some 

instances, RTI did so after requesting and obtaining customer permission; in other instances, RTI 

shipped orders early without customer approval and then prematurely recognized revenue for the 

1

 Securities Act Rel. No. 11088 (Aug. 3, 2022).
2

sales. In multiple quarters, RTI would not have met its revenue guidance without these 

undisclosed pull-forwards. RTI and its former senior management, including its CFO until 

September 2017, Jordheim, did not disclose to investors that RTI’s apparent success at achieving 

its revenue guidance resulted from its reliance on pull-forwards, and they did not disclose the 

known uncertainty that this practice created for RTI’s future revenue streams. In 2020, RTI 

issued a restatement to correct, among other things, its premature recognition of revenue, in 

violation of generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), for orders shipped early to 

customers without their approval. The Commission ordered the Respondents to pay 

$2,075,000.00 in civil money penalties to the Commission. The Commission also created a Fair 

Fund, pursuant to Section 308(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, so the penalties paid can be 

distributed to harmed investors (the “Fair Fund”).

The Fair Fund consists of the $2,075,000.00 paid by the Respondents. The Fair Fund has 

been deposited in a Commission-designated account at the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and 

any accrued interest will be added to the Fair Fund.

The Division of Enforcement (the “Division”) now seeks the appointment of Epiq Class 

Action & Claims Solutions, Inc. (“Epiq”) as the fund administrator and requests that the 

administrator’s bond be set at $2,075,000.00. Epiq is included in the Commission’s approved 

pool of administrators.

The Division further requests that the Commission authorize the Office of Financial 

Management (“OFM”), at the direction of an Assistant Director of the Office of Distributions, to 

pay the Fund Administrator’s fees and expenses from the Fair Fund, so long as the total amount 

paid to the Fund Administrator, including the invoice to be paid, does not exceed the total 

amount of the approved cost proposal submitted by the Fund Administrator.
3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

A. Epiq is appointed as the Fund Administrator, pursuant to Rule 1105(a) of the 

Commission’s Rules on Fair Fund and Disgorgement Plans (“Commission’s 

Rules”);2

B. Epiq shall obtain a bond in accordance with Rule 1105(c) of the Commission’s 

Rules,3in the amount of $2,075,000.00; 

C. the Fund Administrator will submit invoices to the Commission staff for services 

rendered, in accordance with Rule 1105(d) of the Commission’s Rules;4and 

D. at the direction of an Assistant Director of the Office of Distributions, OFM is 

authorized to pay the Fund Administrator’s fees and expenses from the Fair Fund, 

in accordance with Rule 1105(e) of the Commission’s Rules,5so long as the total 

amount paid to the Fund Administrator, including the invoice to be paid, does not 

exceed the total amount of the approved cost proposal submitted by the Fund 

Administrator.

For the Commission, by the Division of Enforcement, pursuant to delegated authority.6

Vanessa A. Countryman

Secretary 

2

 17 C.F.R. § 201.1105(a).

3

 17 C.F.R. § 201.1105(c).

4

 17 C.F.R. § 201.1105(d).

5

 17 C.F.R. § 201.1105(e).

6

 17 C.F.R. § 200.30-4(a)(17) and 17 C.F.R. § 200.30-4(a)(21)(vi).