UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 

Release No. 86330 / July 8, 2019

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-18473

____________________________________

 :

In the Matter of :

 :

VISIUM ASSET MANAGEMENT, LP : ORDER APPROVING PLAN OF 

: DISTRIBUTION

Respondent. :

___________________________________ :

I.

On May 8, 2018, the Commission issued an Order Instituting Administrative and Ceaseand-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21C of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Sections 203(e) and 203(k) of the Investment Advisers Act 

of 1940, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a Cease-and-Desist Order1

against Visium Asset Management, LP (“Visium”). According to the Order, from at least July 

2011 to December 2012, Visium portfolio managers Christopher Plaford (“Plaford”) and Stefan 

Lumiere (“Lumiere”),2engaged in a mismarking scheme, using sham broker quotes to falsely

inflate the value of securities held by a fund for which Visium acted as investment adviser (the 

“Credit Fund”). As a result, the Credit Fund reported falsely inflated returns, overstated its net 

asset value, misclassified certain distressed assets, and paid Visium approximately $3.15 million 

in falsely charged performance and management fees. The Commission further found that 

Visium issued misstatements concerning its valuation policies and procedures, made material 

misstatements in its Form ADV, and failed to enforce certain written policies and procedures 

reasonably designed to prevent insider trading. Based on the foregoing, the Commission found 

that Visium willfully violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”); 

Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 

thereunder; and Sections 204A, 206(1), 206(2), 206(4), and 207 of the Investment Advisers Act 

of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”) and Rules 206(4)-7 and 206(4)-8 thereunder. The Commission 

ordered Visium to pay to the Commission disgorgement of $4,755,223, prejudgment interest of 

$720,711, and a civil money penalty of $4,755,223. Visium has since paid in full.

 

1

Securities Act Rel. No. 10494 (May 8, 2018). 

2 The Commission separately pursued actions against Plaford and Lumiere. See SEC v. Plaford, 16-CV-4511 

(S.D.N.Y.) (KPF) and SEC v. Lumiere, 16-CV-4513 (S.D.N.Y.) (KPF). 
2

By Order dated August 30, 2018, the Commission created a Fair Fund pursuant to 

Section 308(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Fair Fund”)3so that the civil money 

penalty could be distributed to harmed investors with collected disgorgement and prejudgment 

interest. The Fair Fund is deposited in an interest-bearing account at the United States 

Treasury’s Bureau of Fiscal Service and currently holds over $10.2 million. 

 

By Order dated November 16, 2018, the Commission appointed KCC, LLC as the fund 

administrator for the Fair Fund and set the administrator’s bond amount at $10,231,157.4

On March 25, 2019, the Commission published a Notice of Proposed Plan of Distribution 

and Opportunity for Comment (“Notice”),5pursuant to Rule 1103 of the Commission’s Rules on 

Fair Fund and Disgorgement Plans (“Rules”).6 The Notice advised all interested persons that 

they may obtain a copy of the proposed plan of distribution (the “Proposed Plan”) from the 

Commission’s public website at http://www.sec.gov/litigation/fairfundlist.htm or by submitting a 

written request to Catherine E. Pappas, Senior Advisor, United States Securities and Exchange 

Commission, One Penn Center, 1617 JFK Blvd., Ste. 520, Philadelphia, PA 19103. All persons 

who desired to comment on the Proposed Plan were to submit their comments, in writing, no 

later than April 24, 2019. The Commission received one substantive comment during the 

comment period.7

After careful consideration, the Commission has determined to approve the Proposed 

Plan without modification. 

A. Public Comment on the Proposed Plan

Jack Wiener, Esq. submitted a letter dated April 22, 2019, objecting to a claimed 

misstatement in the Proposed Plan.8 According to Mr. Wiener, the Proposed Plan incorrectly 

states that the Commission determined that Visium, through two of its portfolio managers,

engaged in a mismarking scheme. Mr. Wiener claims that the Commission found only that two 

employees of Visium, and not Visium itself, engaged in the scheme. Mr. Wiener requests that 

the claimed misstatement be remedied so that the Proposed Plan does not inadvertently spread a 

material misstatement and so that any related determinations be made properly. 

The Commission has considered this objection and concludes that there is no 

misstatement in the Proposed Plan. By the Order, the Commission held Visium responsible for 

the mismarking scheme perpetrated by its employees, finding, among other things, that, as a 

 

3 Order Establishing Fair Fund, Exchange Act Rel. No. 83998 (Aug. 30, 2018). 

4 Order Appointing Fund Administrator and Setting Administrator Bond Amount, Exchange Act Rel. No. 84608 

(Nov. 16, 2018). 

5

 Exchange Act Rel. No. 85403 (Mar. 25, 2019). 

6

 17 C.F.R. § 201.1103.

7 On or about April 23, 2019, the Commission received two additional letters in response to the Notice, neither of 

which substantively commented on the Proposed Plan. These letters are publicly available at 

https://www.sec.gov/comments/3-18473/3-18473.htm. 

8 Although Mr. Wiener does not specify his interest in the Fair Fund or the Plan in his April 22, 2019 letter, in a 

letter to the Commission dated April 23, 2019, Mr. Wiener indicates that he is writing on behalf of certain investors 

claiming eligibility for a distribution under the Proposed Plan. See note 7, above. 
3

result of the mismarking scheme, Visium misclassified certain assets and made misstatements in 

2012 and 2013 filings with the Commission. For this and other misconduct, the Commission 

charged Visium with violations of the antifraud provisions of the Securities Act, the Exchange 

Act, and the Advisers Act. 

B. Approval of the Proposed Plan

For the reasons stated above, the Commission finds that the Proposed Plan should be 

approved without modification (the “Plan”). 

II.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, pursuant to Rule 1104 of the Rules,

9

that the Plan 

is approved, and it shall be posted simultaneously with this Order on the Commission’s website 

at www.sec.gov.

By the Commission.

Vanessa A. Countryman

Secretary 

 

9

 17 C.F.R. § 201.1104.