1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

 ) 

 ) Case No. 1:20-cv-21887-DPG 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING ) 

COMMISSION, ) Hon. Darrin P. Gayles 

 ) 

Plaintiff, ) 

 ) PLAINTIFF’S EXPEDITED 

 vs. ) MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 

 ) INJUNCTIONAND OTHER 

DANIEL FINGERHUT, ) EQUITABLE RELIEF

DIGITAL PLATINUM, INC., DIGITAL PLATINUM, ) 

LTD., HUF MEDIYA (A.K.A. HOOF MEDIA), TAL ) 

VALARIOLA, and ITAY BARAK ) 

 ) 

 Defendants, ) 

 ) 

AICEL CARBONERO, ) 

 ) 

 Relief Defendant. ) 

_____________________________________________ ) 

Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC” or “Commission”) hereby 

moves the Court on an expedited basis for an order of preliminary injunction against Daniel 

Fingerhut, Digital Platinum, Inc. (“DPI”), Digital Platinum, Ltd. (“DPL”), Huf Mediya (a.k.a. 

Hoof Media) (“Huf”), Tal Valariola (“Valariola”) and Itay Barak (“Barak”) (collectively, 

“Defendants”) enjoining them from committing further violations of the Commodity Exchange 

Act (“Act”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 1-26 (2018), and Commission Regulations, 17 C.F.R. pts. 1-190 (2019), 

and providing for an order freezing Defendants’ assets, requiring an accounting, permitting the 

inspection of books and records, and other equitable relief. 

Contemporaneous with this Expedited Motion for Preliminary Injunction (“Motion”), the 

CFTC filed: (1) a Complaint for Injunctive and Other Equitable Relief and Penalties Under the 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 1 of 11
2 

Commodity Exchange Act (“Complaint”) ; (2) an Expedited Motion for Appointment of a 

Temporary Receiver; (3) a Combined Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff’s Expedited Motion 

for a Preliminary Injunction, and Expedited Motion for Appointment of a Temporary Receiver 

(“Memorandum”); and (4) an Expedited Motion for Expedited Discovery. In further support of 

this Motion, the CFTC states as follows: 

1. As demonstrated in the CFTC’s accompanying Complaint, Memorandum, and the 

declarations and attachments to the Memorandum which the CFTC incorporates into this Motion 

by reference, Defendants have fraudulently solicited tens of millions of customers to open and 

fund illegal, off-exchange binary options and digital asset trading accounts through websites 

operated by unregistered binary options and digital asset brokers. Defendants created and/or 

disseminated fraudulent solicitations (referred to as campaigns) that advised unsuspecting 

prospective customers to open and fund trading accounts with brokers to access the marketed 

automated trading software that purported to generate astronomical profits with no risk of loss. 

Defendants’ solicitations included numerous false or misleading statements about the advertised 

trading software, including: (i) fictitious trading performance and account statements showing 

consistent profits with no losses; (ii) actors depicted as true users and/or creators of the binary 

options and/or digital assets automated trading software falsely claiming they had earned 

significant profits through use of the software; and/or (iii) false representations of actual live 

automated trading and results using the advertised software. 

2. In addition, upon receipt of a Commission subpoena in August 2018 concerning 

the Commission’s investigations related to binary options solicitation fraud, Fingerhut offered to 

cooperate, prepare a sworn declaration, and testify as a witness against his former colleagues in 

connection with a related matter, CFTC v. Atkinson, No. 18-cv-23992 (S.D. Fla. September 27, 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 2 of 11
3 

2018). However, rather than fully and truthfully cooperate, Fingerhut intentionally or recklessly 

made materially false or misleading statements to Commission Staff and under oath. In 

particular, Fingerhut made materially false or misleading statements related to (1) his use and 

deletion of business email accounts, (2) the nature and extent of his role in the fraud, and (3) his 

possession of a laptop computer. 

3. Fingerhut paid off the mortgage on his home with ill-gotten gains in July 2018 

and then quit-claimed the deed to Relief Defendant Aicel Carbonero in August 2018. Carbonero 

has no justifiable claim or legal interest in the property. 

4. By engaging in the conduct described herein and in the Complaint, Defendants 

violated the core anti-fraud sections of the Act, specifically:

i. Between June 2014 and October 2016, Fingerhut violated Section 4c(b) of the 

Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6c(b) (2018), and Regulation 32.4, 17 C.F.R. § 32.4 (2019), 

which prohibits fraud in connection with commodity options transactions, and 

Section 4o(1) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6o(1) (2018), which prohibits fraud by, 

among others, a Commodity Trading Advisor (“CTA”) or an associated 

person of a CTA; 

ii. AIP’s binary options fraud violated the prohibitions against options fraud (7 

U.S.C. § 6c(b) and 17 C.F.R. § 32.4) and swaps fraud (Section 6(c)(1) of the 

Act, 7 U.S.C. § 9(c)(1) (2018), and Regulation 180.1(a)(1)-(3), 17 C.F.R. 

§ 180.1(a)(1)-(3) (2019)) between October 2013 and November 2016, 

including through Fingerhut’s acts between June 2014 and October 2016; 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 3 of 11
4 

iii. Valariola and Barak willfully aided and abetted AIP’s conduct constituting 

violations of §§ 6c(b) and 9(c)(1) of the Act and Regulations 32.4 and 

180.1(a)(1)-(3) pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13c(a) (2016). 

Valariola and Barak acted within the scope of their agency, employment, or 

office with DPL, therefore, DPL is liable for their conduct pursuant to 

7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(B) and 17 C.F.R. §1.2.Valariola and Barak are also liable 

as control persons of DPL for its violations pursuant to 13(b) of the Act, 7 

U.S.C. § 13c(b) (2018), because Valariola and Barak controlled DPL, failed to 

act in good faith and/or knowingly induced DPL’s violations between October 

2013 and November 2016. 

iv. Between October 2016 and August 2018, Fingerhut, DPI, DPL, Huf, 

Valariola, and Barak violated § 9(c)(1) of the Act and Regulation 180.1(a)(1)-

(3), which prohibit deceptive devices, schemes and/or artifices in connection 

with, among other things, commodities in interstate commerce and/or swap 

(options) transactions; and 

v. Between August 2018 and May 2019, Fingerhut violated Section 6(c)(2) of 

the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 9(c)(2) (2018), which prohibits providing false or 

misleading information to the Commission. 

5. The Act authorizes the CFTC to seek injunctive relief whenever it appears that a 

person or entity has engaged, is engaging, or is about to engage in any act or practice that 

violates the Act or CFTC Regulations. 7 U.S.C. §13a-1(a); see also CFTC v. Wilshire Inv. Mgmt. 

Corp, 531 F.3d 1339, 1343 (11th Cir. 2008). 

6. “Upon a proper showing, a permanent or temporary injunction . . . shall be 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 4 of 11
5 

granted without bond.” 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(b); see also Wilshire Inv. Mgmt. Corp., 531 F.3d at 

1343. 

7. To make a proper showing that injunctive relief is merited under § 13a-1(a) of the 

Act, the CFTC must show a person violated and is likely to continue violating the Act, the latter 

of which “may be inferred from past unlawful conduct.” CFTC v. British Am. Commodity 

Options, 560 F.2d 135, 142 (2d Cir. 1977); see also CFTC v. Sidoti, 178 F.3d 1132, 1137 (11th 

Cir. 1999) (finding no abuse of discretion in permanently enjoining further violations “[i]n light 

of the likelihood of future violations”). “It has long been recognized that in an action brought to 

enforce the requirements of remedial statutes such as [the Act], a district court has broad discretion to 

fashion appropriate relief.” CFTC v. Miller, 570 F.2d 1296, 1300 (5th Cir. 1978) (upholding injunction 

prohibiting defendant from concealing or disposing of assets). The “unqualified grant of statutory 

authority to issue an injunction under 13a-1 [of the Act] carries with it the full range of equitable 

remedies.” Wilshire Inv. Mgmt. Corp., 531 at 1344 (holding restitution authorized though not 

specifically enumerated in Section 6c of the Act). 

8. The overwhelming evidence collected thus far reflecting Defendants’ massive 

fraud, scienter, and their failure to appreciate the wrongful nature of their misconduct is highly 

suggestive of future violations of the Act. Thus, injunctive relief is necessary to prevent 

Defendants from continuing to defraud others and from any further attempt to evade regulatory 

scrutiny of their actions. Moreover, Defendants’ efforts to obfuscate the existence, accessibility, 

and production of responsive documents and information demonstrates that injunctive relief is 

necessary to prevent (further) destruction of Defendants’ book and records and to preserve the 

CFTC’s ability to obtain full and complete relief for victims of Defendants’ massive fraud upon 

final adjudication of this action. 

9. To preserve the status quo and ensure an adequate remedy remains available for 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 5 of 11
6 

victims, the CFTC seeks expedited consideration of its Motion. Specifically, the CFTC requests 

that the Court set a hearing for three weeks from the date of filing. In the interim, the CFTC has 

separately sought on an expedited basis the ability to conduct expedited discovery to prepare for 

the hearing. 

WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that the Court enter an order of 

preliminary injunction: 

A. Prohibiting Fingerhut from: 

a. Offering to enter into, entering into, confirming execution of, maintaining positions 

in, or otherwise conducting activities relating to binary options or any commodity 

interest (as that term is defined in Regulation 1.3(yy), 17 C.F.R. §1.3(yy)(2019); 

b. Acting as an affiliate marketer, CTA, or Associated Person of a CTA in any capacity 

that involves binary options or any commodity interest (as that term is defined in 

Regulation 1.3(yy), 17 C.F.R. §1.3(yy)(2019); 

c. Offering so-called autotrading systems or services that purport to trade binary options 

or any commodity interest (as that term is defined in Regulation 1.3(yy), 17 C.F.R. 

§1.3(yy)(2019); 

d. Using the instrumentalities of interstate commerce to (1) cheat or defraud, or attempt 

to cheat or defraud, customers or prospective customers; (2) make or cause to be 

made false reports or statements to customers or prospective customers; or (3) 

deceive or attempt to deceive customers and prospective customers , or in connection 

with, an offer to enter into, the entry into, or the confirmation of the execution of, any 

commodity option transaction or otherwise violating Section 4c(b) of the Act, 7 

U.S.C. §6c(b) (2018), and Regulation 32.4, 17 C.F.R. 32.4 (2019); 

e. Using the mails or any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, directly or 

indirectly to (A) employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud any participant; or 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 6 of 11
7 

(B) engage in any transaction, practice, or course of business that operates as a fraud 

or deceit upon any participant, in violation of Section of 4o(1) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 

§6o(1) (2012); 

f. Using the instrumentalities of interstate commerce to (1) use or employ, or attempt to 

use or employ, manipulative devices, schemes, and artifices to defraud; (2) make, or 

attempt to make, untrue or misleading statements of a material fact; (3) omit to state 

material facts necessary in order to make statements not untrue or misleading; or (4) 

engage, or attempt to engage, in acts, practices, and courses of business, which 

operate or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon customers or prospective 

customers in connection with swap transaction or otherwise violate Section 6(c)(1) of 

the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 9(c)(1) (2018), and Regulation 180.1(a), 17 C.F.R. 

§180.1(a)(1),(3) (2019); 

g. Making false or misleading statements to or using false documents with the 

Commission or otherwise violate Section 6(c)(2) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 9(c)(2); 

h. Destroying, deleting, deactivating or altering in any way any email account used to 

conduct business related to All In Publishing, Digital Platinum, Inc., Digital Platinum 

Ltd, and/or Huf Mediya; and 

i. Destroying or altering in any way any laptop computer, tablet, mobile telephone or 

other electronic device used to conduct business related to All In Publishing, Digital 

Platinum, Inc., Digital Platinum Ltd., Huf Mediya, Tal Valariola, and/or Itay Barak. 

B. Prohibiting Digital Platinum Ltd., Tal Valariola, and Itay Barak from: 

a. Offering to enter into, entering into, confirming execution of, maintaining positions 

in, or otherwise conducting activities relating to binary options or any commodity 

interest (as that term is defined in Regulation 1.3(yy), 17 C.F.R. §1.3(yy)(2019); 

b. Offering so-called autotrading systems or services that purport to trade binary options 

or any commodity interest (as that term is defined in Regulation 1.3(yy), 17 C.F.R. 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 7 of 11
8 

§1.3(yy)(2019); 

c. Using the instrumentalities of interstate commerce to (1) cheat or defraud, or attempt 

to cheat or defraud, customers or prospective customers; (2) make or cause to be 

made false reports or statements to customers or prospective customers; or (3) 

deceive or attempt to deceive customers and prospective customers , or in connection 

with, an offer to enter into, the entry into, or the confirmation of the execution of, any 

commodity option transaction or otherwise violating Section 4c(b) of the Act, 7 

U.S.C. §6c(b) (2018), and Regulation 32.4, 17 C.F.R. 32.4 (2019); 

C. Prohibiting Digital Platinum, Inc., Huf Mediya, Tal Valariola, and Itay Barak from: 

a. Using the instrumentalities of interstate commerce to (1) use or employ, or attempt to 

use or employ, manipulative devices, schemes, and artifices to defraud; (2) make, or 

attempt to make, untrue or misleading statements of a material fact; (3) omit to state 

material facts necessary in order to make statements not untrue or misleading; or (4) 

engage, or attempt to engage, in acts, practices, and courses of business, which 

operate or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon customers or prospective 

customers in connection with any swap transaction or commodity in interstate 

commerce, or otherwise violate Section 6(c)(1) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 9(c)(1) (2018), 

and Regulation 180.1(a), 17 C.F.R. §180.1(a)(1),(3) (2019); and 

b. Destroying, deleting, deactivating or altering in any way any email account, backend 

system, websites, and communications used to conduct business related to All In 

Publishing, binary options, and any commodity interest (as that term is defined in 17 

C.F.R. §1.3(yy)); 

c. Destroying or altering in any way any laptop computer, tablet, mobile telephone or 

other electronic device used to conduct business related to All In Publishing, binary 

options, and any commodity interest (as that term is defined in 17 C.F.R. §1.3(yy)). 

D. Prohibiting each Defendant from trading on or subject to the rules of any registered entity (as 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 8 of 11
9 

that term is defined in Section 1a of the Act, 7 U.S.C. §1a (2018)); 

E. Prohibiting each Defendant from entering into any transactions involving “commodity 

interests” (as that term is defined in Regulation 1.3(yy), 17 C.F.R. §1.3(yy)(2019)) for their 

personal account or for any account in which they have a direct or indirect interest; 

F. Prohibiting each Defendant from (i) having any commodity interests traded on their behalf; 

(ii) controlling or directing the trading for or on behalf of any other person or entity, whether 

by power of attorney or otherwise, n any account involving commodity interests; or (iii) 

soliciting, receiving or accepting any funds from person for the purpose of purchasing or 

selling any commodity interests; 

G. Prohibiting each Defendant from applying for registration or claiming exemption from 

registration with the Commission in any capacity, and engaging in any activity requiring such 

registration or exemption from registration with the Commission, except as provided for in 

Regulation 4.14(a)(9), 17 C.F.R. §4.14(a)(9) (2019); 

H. Prohibiting each Defendant from acting as a principal (as that term is defined in Regulation 

3.1(a), 17 C.F.R. §3.1(a) (2019)), agent or any other officer or employee of any person (as 

that term is defined in Section 1a(38) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. §1a(38) (2018)) registered, 

exempted from registration or required to be registered with the Commission except as 

provided for in Regulation 4.14(a)(9), 17 C.F.R. §4.14(a)(9) (2019); 

I. Requiring each Defendant to file with the Court, within ten days of the date of the Court’s 

order of a preliminary injunction, a complete and accurate accounting of all of their assets 

and liabilities, wherever located, together with all funds they received from and paid to others 

in connection with (i) work related to All In Publishing, DPI, DPL, and Huf; and (ii) 

commodity futures transactions or purported commodity futures transactions, including 

binary options and digital assets; 

J. Prohibiting each Defendant and Relief Defendant and any firm, corporation, or other person 

or entity with notice that holds any accounts, funds, assets, or other property of Defendants 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 9 of 11
10 

from withdrawing, transferring, removing, dissipating, concealing, assigning, pledging, 

encumbering, disbursing, converting, selling, or otherwise disposing of, in any manner, any 

funds, assets, or other property of Defendants, wherever situated; 

K. Prohibiting each Defendant and Relief Defendant, all persons insofar as they are acting in the 

capacity of any Defendant’s or Relief Defendant’s agents, servants, successors, employees, 

assigns, and attorneys, and all persons insofar as they are acting in active concert or 

participation with Defendants and Relief Defendants who receive actual notice of such order 

by personal service or otherwise, from destroying, mutilating, concealing, altering, disposing 

of, in any manner, any books, records, or other documents of Defendants and Relief 

Defendant, including all such records concerning Defendants’ solicitation and trading 

activities, wherever located; 

L. Prohibiting each Defendant and Relief Defendant, all persons insofar as they are acting in the 

capacity of any Defendant’s agents, servants, successors, employees, assigns, and attorneys, 

and all persons insofar as they are acting in active concert or participation with Defendants 

and Relief Defendant who receive actual notice of such order by personal service or 

otherwise, from refusing to permit authorized representatives of the CFTC to inspect, image, 

and copy, when and as reasonably requested, any books, records, or other documents of 

Defendants and Relief Defendant, including all such records concerning Defendants’ and 

Relief Defendant’s solicitation and trading activities, assets, and property, wherever located, 

and whether they are in the possession of Defendants or others, either on or off the premises 

where they may be situated; 

M. Authorizing that copies of the [Proposed] Order of Preliminary Injunction and Appointment 

of Temporary Receiver may be served by any means, including personal service, United 

Parcel Service, Federal Express, or other commercial overnight service, email, facsimile, 

Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or Articles 2 through 10 of the Hague 

Convention, Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents, upon any financial 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 10 of 11
11 

institution or other entity or assets of Defendants and Relief Defendant that may be subject to 

any provision of the order of preliminary injunction; and 

N. Awarding such further relief as the Court deems necessary and appropriate under the 

circumstances. 

Dated: May 6, 2019 Respectfully submitted, 

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

525 West Monroe Street, Suite 1100 

Chicago, Illinois 60661 

(312) 596-0714 facsimile 

(312) 596-0700 

/s/ Allison V. Passman 

Allison V. Passman 

Senior Trial Attorney 

Special Bar ID #A5502489 

apassman@cftc.gov 

Candice Haan 

Trial Attorney 

Special Bar ID #A5502564 

chaan@cftc.gov 

Susan J. Gradman 

Chief Trial Attorney 

Special Bar ID #A5501721 

sgradman@cftc.gov 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 11 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/06/2020 Page 11 of 11