Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: ASA V. WILDER 

DOCKET NUMBER: 154 

DATE: APRIL 8, 1968 

DOCUMENT TYPE: COMPLAINT 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE 

In re: Asa V. Wilder, Respondent 

CEA Docket No. 154 

Complaint and Notice of Hearing Under Section 6(b) of the Commodity Exchange 

Act 

There is reason to believe that the respondent, Asa V. Wilder, has violated 

the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), and the regulations made 

pursuant thereto (17 CFR, Part I), and in accordance with the provisions of 

section 6(b) of the said act (7 U.S.C. 9), this complaint and notice of hearing 

is issued stating the charges in that respect as follows: 

I 

The respondent, Asa V. Wilder, an individual whose address is 316 Virginia 

Avenue, San Mateo, California, was, at all times material to this complaint, 

employed as the commodity manager of a branch office of Harris, Upham & Co., a 

stock and commodity brokerage firm. The said firm was, at all times material to 

this complaint, a registered futures commission merchant under the Commodity 

Exchange Act and entitled to membership privileges on various markets, which 

were duly designated contract markets under the said act. 

II 

At all times material to this complaint, the respondent personally handled 

the stock and commodity futures trading accounts of one Mrs. Bertha Hecht, a 

customer of Harris, Upham & Co., and in so doing gained her confidence to the 

extent that the trading in such accounts was conducted on the respondent's 

advice or at his discretion. 

III 

Acting for the purpose and with the intent of concealing from Mrs. Bertha 

Hecht the extent of the losses sustained by her in trading in commodity futures, 

the respondent: 

(1) In 14 instances during the period February 20, 1963 through July 25, 

1963, in closing out offsetting transactions in soybean, wheat and rye futures 

for her account, selectively closed out certain transactions in a manner which 

reflected larger profits or smaller losses than would have resulted had the 

oldest trades been closed out. Thereby, the respondent, for a period of time, 

concealed from Mrs. Hecht the actual amount of her losses. 

(2) On or about March 29, 1963, prepared and delivered a "summary of 

operations" statement to Mrs. Hecht purportedly showing the status of her 

trading accounts as of such date, but the respondent did not show in such 

statement, and concealed from Mrs. Hecht, the fact that as of March 29, 1963, 

she had unrealized 
Page 2 

losses in her commodity futures trading account of over $ 34,000. Of such 

losses, $ 9,200 would have been reported to Mrs. Hecht by Harris, Upham & Co. on 

March 28, 1963, if on that date the respondent had not selectively closed out 

certain transactions for her account. 

IV 

By reason of the facts set forth in this complaint, the respondent, in 

connection with the disposition or execution of commodity futures contracts, and 

in regard to acts of agency performed with respect to such contracts, deceived 

the person on behalf of whom such contracts were made, in wilfull violation of 

section 4b of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 6b); and applied and closed 

out off-setting long and short positions in wilfull violation of section 1.46 of 

the regulations issued under the said act (17 CFR 1.46). 

WHEREFORE, it is hereby ordered that this complaint and notice of hearing be 

served upon the respondent. The respondent will have twenty (20) days after the 

receipt of this complaint in which to file with the Hearing Clerk, United States 

Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. 20250, an answer with an original 

and three copies, fully and completely stating the nature of the defense and 

admitting or denying, specifically and in detail, each allegation of this 

complaint. Allegations not answered will be deemed admitted for the Purposes of 

this proceeding. Failure to file an answer will constitute an admission of all 

the allegations of this complaint and a waiver of 

hearing. The filing of an answer in which all of the material allegations of 

fact contained in the complaint are admitted likewise shall constitute a waiver 

of hearing unless a hearing is requested. The respondent is hereby notified 

that unless hearing is waived, a hearing will be held at 10:00 a.m., local time, 

on May 28, 1968, in San Francisco, California, at a place therein to be 

specified later, before a referee designated to conduct such hearing. At such 

hearing the respondent will have the right to appear and show cause, if any 

there be, why an order should not be made directing that all contract markets 

refuse all trading privileges to the respondent for such period of time as may 

be determined. 

It is ordered that this complaint and notice of hearing be served on the 

respondent at least twenty (20) days prior to the date set for hearing. 

Done at Washington, D. C. 

April 8, 1968. 

[SEE SIGNATURE IN ORIGINAL] 

Assistant Secretary 

George L. Mehren 

LOAD-DATE: June 16, 2008 
Page 3