UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-21887-GAYLES/OTAZO-REYES

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

DANIEL FINGERGUT, et al., 

Defendants,

AICEL CARBONERO, 

Relief Defendant.

________________________________________/

DEFAULT FINAL JUDGMENT 

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission’s (“CFTC”) Motion for Final Judgment by Default, Permanent Injunction, Civil 

Monetary Penalties, and Other Statutory and Equitable Relief against Defendants Digital Platinum, 

Inc. and Huf Mediya, Ltd. (“Motion”) [ECF No. 288]. The Court has considered the Motion and

the record and is otherwise fully advised. Based thereon, the Court finds that good cause exists for 

entry of the Final Judgment. Accordingly, the CFTC’s Motion is GRANTED. The Court further 

finds and orders as follows: 

I. FINDING OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. On May 5, 2020, CFTC filed a Complaint charging Defendants Daniel Fingerhut

(“Fingerhut”), Tal Valariola, Itay Barak, Digital Platinum, Ltd., Digital Platinum, Inc., and Huf 

Mediya, Ltd. (“Defendants”) with violating Sections 4c(b), 4o(1), and 6(c)(1) and 6(c)(2) of the 

Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA” or “Act”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 6c(b), 6o(1), 9(1), and 9(2), and 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 333 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/08/2023 Page 1 of 10
2

Commission Regulations (“Regulations”) 32.4 and 180.1(a), 17 C.F.R. §§ 32.4, 180.1(a) (2021). 

[ECF No. 1]. The CFTC filed an Amended Complaint on June 12, 2020, adding allegations 

concerning service of process. [ECF No. 101]. The Amended Complaint further alleged that 

Relief Defendant Aicel Carbonero (“Carbonero”), who was not charged with violations of the Act

or Regulations, received funds and assets from Defendant Fingerhut to which Relief Defendant

held no legitimate interest or entitlement and which were derived from Defendant Fingerhut’s

fraudulent and violative acts.

2. On May 11, 2020, Defendant Digital Platinum, Inc. (“DPI”) was properly served 

with the summons and Complaint pursuant to Rule 4(h)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure by personally delivering and mailing a copy of the Complaint and summons to DPI’s

registered agent. [ECF No. 62]. No later than December 18, 2020, Defendant Huf Mediya, Ltd. 

(“Huf” or “Huf Mediya”) was properly served with process pursuant to Rule 4(l)(2)(A) by 

delivering a copy of the Complaint and summons in the manner set forth in the Hague Convention 

on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters. 

[ECF No. 207].

3. On January 7, 2021, the Court entered a Preliminary Injunction against all 

Defendants, including DPI and Huf Mediya, that, among other things, authorized the freezing of 

assets held in the name of or under the control or management of the Defendants. [ECF No. 199]. 

The Court’s order entering the Preliminary Injunction also appointed Melanie Damian, Esquire, of 

the law firm Damian & Valori LLP, as a permanent receiver (“Permanent Receiver”) in this action. 

Id. at 34.

4. Defendants DPI and Huf Mediya failed to appear or answer the Complaint within 

the time permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1). Accordingly, the CFTC filed motions for entry of 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 333 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/08/2023 Page 2 of 10
3

default against DPI and Huf Mediya on July 28, 2020, [ECF No. 139], and January 19, 2021, [ECF 

No. 217], respectively. Pursuant to Rule 55(a), the Clerk of this Court entered defaults against 

Defendants DPI and Huf Mediya on July 29, 2020, [ECF No. 145], and January 20, 2021, [ECF 

No. 218], respectively. 

5. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1, which 

provides that whenever it shall appear to the CFTC that any person has engaged, is engaging, or is 

about to engage in any act or practice constituting a violation of any provision of the Act or any 

rule, regulation, or order promulgated thereunder, the CFTC may bring an action in the proper 

district court of the United States against such person to enjoin such act or practice, or to enforce 

compliance with the Act, or any rule, regulation or order thereunder.

6. Venue properly lies with this Court pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(e) because 

Defendants DPI and Huf transacted business in this judicial district, and the acts and practices in 

violation of the CEA and Regulations occurred, are occurring or are about to occur within this 

judicial district, among other places.

7. The CFTC now moves for final judgment by default against Defendants DPI and 

Huf Mediya, an order of permanent injunctive relief, and the imposition of disgorgement and a

civil monetary penalty. [ECF No. 288].

8. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2), the Court is authorized to enter a 

final judgment of default against a party who has failed to plead in response to a complaint. “[A] 

defendant’s default does not in itself warrant the court entering a default judgment.” DirecTV, Inc. 

v. Huynh, 318 F. Supp. 2d 1122, 1127 (M.D. Ala. 2004) (quoting Nishimatsu Constr. Co., Ltd. v. 

Hous. Nat’l Bank, 515 F.2d 1200, 1206 (5th Cir. 1975)). Granting a motion for default judgment 

is within the trial court’s discretion. See Nishimatsu, 515 F.2d at 1206. Upon a review of the 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 333 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/08/2023 Page 3 of 10
4

CFTC’s submissions, and by virtue of the default and failure to respond to the Complaint, 

Defendants DPI and Huf Mediya are deemed to have admitted the allegations of the Complaint, 

and the CFTC has established liability against DPI and Huf Mediya and its entitlement to relief 

against both defendants. S.E.C. v. Abatement Corp. Holding Co., No. 14-CV-23336, 2014 WL 

5488760, at *1 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 29, 2014) (citing Buchanan v. Bowman, 820 F.2d 359, 361 (11th 

Cir. 1987)).

It is FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

II. PERMANENT INJUNCTION, DISGORGEMENT, AND CIVIL PENALTY

9. Based upon and in connection with the foregoing conduct, pursuant to Section 6c 

of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1, Defendants Digital Platinum, Inc. and Huf Mediya, Ltd. are 

permanently restrained, enjoined, and prohibited from directly or indirectly:

a. Engaging in affiliate marketing, including the creation and dissemination of emails 

or other solicitation materials, concerning any “commodity interest,” as that term 

is defined by 17 C.F.R. § 1.3 (2021), or any automated trading system concerning 

any commodity interest, in violation of Section 6c(1) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) 

and Regulation 180.1(a), 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a) (2021). 

10. Defendants Digital Platinum, Inc. and Huf Mediya, Ltd. are also permanently 

restrained, enjoined, and prohibited from directly or indirectly: 

a. Trading on or subject to the rules of any registered entity (as that term is defined in 

Section 1a(40) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 1a(40));

b. Entering into any transactions involving commodity interests, for their own personal 

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

c. Having any commodity interests traded on their behalf; 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 333 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/08/2023 Page 4 of 10
5

d. Controlling or directing the trading for or on behalf of any other person or entity, 

whether by power of attorney or otherwise, in any account involving commodity 

interests; 

e. Soliciting, receiving, or accepting any funds from any person for the purpose of 

purchasing or selling any commodity interests; 

f. Applying for registration or claiming exemption from registration with the CFTC

in any capacity, and engaging in any activity requiring such registration or 

exemption from registration with the CFTC, except as provided for in Regulation 

4.14(a)(9), 17 C.F.R. § 4.14(a)(9) (2021); and/or

g. Acting as a principal (as that term is defined in Regulation 3.1(a), 17 C.F.R. § 3.1(a)

(2021)), agent, or any other officer or employee of any person (as that term is 

defined in 7 U.S.C. § 1a(38)), registered, exempted from registration or required to 

be registered with the CFTC except as provided for in 17 C.F.R. § 4.14(a)(9).

11. Defendants DPI and Huf shall pay, jointly and severally, disgorgement in the 

amount of three million, six hundred forty-four thousand, four hundred sixty-four dollars

($3,644,464) (“Disgorgement Obligation”), representing the gains received in connection with 

Defendants DPI and Huf’s violations, described above. If the Disgorgement Obligation is not paid 

immediately, then post-judgment interest shall accrue on the Disgorgement Obligation beginning 

on the date of entry of this Order and shall be determined by using the Treasury Bill rate prevailing 

on the date of entry of this Order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961.

12. Defendants DPI and Huf shall make Disgorgement Obligation payments, and any 

post-judgment interest payments, under this Consent Order to the Permanent Receiver in the 

name “DPL Receivership Estate” and shall send such payments by electronic funds transfer, or

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 333 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/08/2023 Page 5 of 10
6

by U.S. postal money order, certified check, bank cashier’s check, or bank money order, to the 

Permanent Receiver at the office of Damian & Valori LLP, 1000 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1020, 

Miami, Florida 33131, under a cover letter that identifies the paying Defendant(s) and the name 

and docket number of this proceeding. Defendants DPI and Huf shall simultaneously transmit 

copies of the cover letter and the form of payment to the Chief Financial Officer, Commodity 

Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 

20581.

13. The Permanent Receiver shall oversee the Disgorgement Obligation and shall 

have the discretion to determine the manner of distribution of such funds equitably to 

Defendants DPI and Huf’s customers identified by the CFTC or through her investigation and 

as approved by the Court or may defer distribution until the Permanent Receiver deems 

appropriate. The Permanent Receiver shall propose a consolidated plan to distribute the 

disgorgement amount to the Court within ninety days of this Order's entry date. If the amount 

of Disgorgement Obligation payments to the Permanent Receiver are of a de minimis nature 

such that the Permanent Receiver determines that the administrative cost of making a 

distribution to eligible participants is impractical, then the Permanent Receiver may, in her 

discretion, treat such disgorgement payments as civil monetary penalty payments, which the 

Permanent Receiver shall forward to the CFTC following the instructions for civil monetary 

penalty payments set forth below.

14. Until discharged by the Court, the Permanent Receiver shall also provide the 

CFTC at the beginning of each calendar year with a report detailing the disbursement of funds. 

The Permanent Receiver shall transmit this report under a cover letter that identifies the name 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 333 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/08/2023 Page 6 of 10
7

and docket number of this proceeding to the Chief Financial Officer, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20581.

15. To the extent that any funds accrue to the U.S. Treasury for the satisfaction of 

Defendants DPI and Huf’s Disgorgement Obligation, such funds shall be transferred to the 

Permanent Receiver for disbursement in accordance with the procedures set forth above.

16. Defendants DPI and Huf shall pay, jointly and severally, a civil monetary penalty 

in the amount of ten million, nine hundred thirty-three thousand, three hundred ninety-two dollars 

($10,933,392) (“CMP Obligation”). If the CMP Obligation is not paid immediately, then postjudgment interest shall accrue on the CMP Obligation beginning on the date of entry of this Order 

and shall be determined by using the Treasury Bill rate prevailing on the date of entry of this Order 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961.

17. Defendants DPI and Huf shall pay their CMP Obligation and any post-judgment 

interest, by electronic funds transfer, U.S. postal money order, certified check, bank cashier’s 

check, or bank money order. If payment is to be made other than by electronic funds transfer, then 

the payment shall be made payable to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and sent to 

the address below:

CFTC

C/O ESC/AMK-326; RM 265

6500 S. MacArthur Blvd.

Oklahoma City, OK 73169

(405) 954-6569 office

(405) 954-1620 fax

9-AMC-AR-CFTC@faa.gov

If payment by electronic funds transfer is chosen, Defendants DPI and Huf shall contact Jamie 

Stovall or her successor at the address above to receive payment instructions and shall fully comply 

with those instructions. Defendants DPI and Huf shall accompany payment of the CMP Obligation 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 333 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/08/2023 Page 7 of 10
8

with a cover letter that identifies Defendants DPI and Huf and the name and docket number of this 

proceeding. Defendants DPI and Huf shall simultaneously transmit copies of the cover letter and 

the form of payment to the Chief Financial Officer, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 

Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20581.

18. With regard to any funds accumulated or collected by the Permanent Receiver, the 

funds shall be first distributed to satisfy the Disgorgement Obligation. Then the funds shall be 

distributed to satisfy the CMP if funds are available. Finally, the Permanent Receiver shall 

provide written notice in accordance with Paragraph 37 to Defendants DPI and Huf of any partial 

and complete satisfaction of these obligations. 

19. Partial Satisfaction: Acceptance by the Commission/CFTC or the Permanent 

Receiver of any partial payment of Defendants DPI and Huf’s Disgorgement Obligation or CMP 

Obligation shall not be deemed a waiver of their obligation to make further payments pursuant 

to this Order, or a waiver of the CFTC’s right to seek to compel payment of any remaining 

balance.

20. Asset Freeze: On January 7, 2021, the Court entered a preliminary injunction as to 

all Defendants, including Defendants DPI and Huf, that prohibited the withdrawal, transfer, 

removal, dissipation, or encumbering of any funds, assets, or property held by Defendants DPI 

and Huf. (ECF No. 199 at 33 ¶ 6.) The court hereby lifts the preliminary injunction as it applies 

to Defendants DPI and Huf.

21. Notice: All notices required to be given by any provision in this Order shall be sent 

by certified mail, return receipt requested, as follows:

Notice to CFTC:

Robert T. Howell

Deputy Director, Division of Enforcement

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 333 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/08/2023 Page 8 of 10
9 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

525 West Monroe, Suite 1100 

Chicago, IL 60661 

Notice to Defendants Digital Platinum, Inc. and Huf Mediya, Ltd.: 

Digital Platinum, Inc. (by email)

c/o Jay Passerino (registered agent) (jay.passerino@gmail.com) 

Huf, Ltd. (by UPS) 

c/o Kiril Strahilov Angelov

village 13 Negovan 

Nezabravka str., Bulgaria 

All such notices to the CFTC or Defendants DPI and Huf shall reference this action’s 

name and docket number. 

22. Change of Address/Phone: Until Defendants DPI and Huf satisfy in full their 

Disgorgement Obligation and CMP Obligation as set forth in this Order, Defendants DPI and 

Huf shall provide written notice to the CFTC by certified mail of any change to its telephone 

number and mailing address within ten calendar days of the change. 

23. Invalidation: If any provision of this Order or if the application of any provision or 

circumstance is held invalid, then the remainder of this Order and the application of the provision 

to any other person or circumstance shall not be affected by the holding. 

24. Continuing Jurisdiction of this Court: This Court shall retain jurisdiction of this 

action to ensure compliance with this Order and for all other purposes related to this action, 

including any motion by Defendants DPI and Huf to modify or for relief from the terms of this 

Order. 

25. Injunctive and Equitable Relief Provisions: The injunctive and equitable relief 

provisions of this Order shall be binding upon Defendants DPI and Huf, upon any person under 

the authority or control of any of Defendants DPI and Huf, and upon any person who receives actual 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 333 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/08/2023 Page 9 of 10
10

notice of this Order, by personal service, e-mail, facsimile or otherwise insofar as he or she is 

acting in active concert or participation with Defendants DPI and Huf.

It is FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this Court shall retain jurisdiction 

of this matter and over Defendants DPI and Huf Mediya to implement and carry out the terms of 

this Final Judgment and all Orders and Decrees that may be entered, to entertain any suitable 

application or motion for additional relief within the jurisdiction of this Court, and to order any 

other relief that this Court deems appropriate under the circumstances.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 8th day of February, 2023.

________________________________

DARRIN P. GAYLES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: All Counsel of Record

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 333 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/08/2023 Page 10 of 10