1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff,

v.

FISHER CAPITAL LLC, AMS CONSULTING 

SOLUTIONS LLC, and ALEXANDER 

SPELLANE a/k/a “Alexander Overlie,”

Defendants.

Case No. 23-CV-3121

ECF Case

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE 

AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF 

AND FOR CIVIL MONETARY 

PENALTIES UNDER THE 

COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT 

AND COMMISSION REGULATIONS 

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

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

by its attorneys, alleges as follows: 

I. SUMMARY

1. From at least June 1, 2020 and continuing to the present (“Relevant

Period”), Defendant Alexander Spellane, and the companies he controlled – AMS

Consulting Solutions LLC d/b/a Fisher Capital, and Fisher Capital LLC (collectively 

“Fisher Capital Group”) – have engaged and continue to engage in a fraudulent scheme 

targeting a vulnerable population of mostly elderly and retirement-aged persons

throughout the United States. Defendants’ scheme was to fraudulently persuade victims, 

through materially false and misleading statements and deceptive sales tactics, to invest

their retirement funds and savings in gold and silver coins (“Precious Metals”) at grossly 

inflated prices that frequently were double or even triple the prevailing market value of 

those coins.

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 1 of 41 PageID #: 1
2

2. Each step of Defendants’ sales process was permeated with material 

misrepresentations, misleading half-truths, and deceptive omissions that were designed to 

build trust with elderly and retirement-aged customers; instill fear about the safety of 

traditional retirement and savings accounts; and deceive victims into purchasing grossly 

overpriced Precious Metals from Defendants. 

3. Defendants materially misled victims about, among other things, the 

identity, business model, size, scale, reputation, experience, background and history of 

Fisher Capital Group, its agents, and representatives; the safety and liquidity of 

customers’ existing savings and retirement accounts as compared to Precious Metals 

investments; and the value of the Precious Metals sold by Defendants. For example, 

Defendants falsely represented on Fisher Capital Group’s website that Fisher Capital 

Group’s mission was to help retirees secure their financial future through “safe and 

secure” investments in “fully liquid assets that are guaranteed on your principal,” that its 

top priority was helping customers “invest safely and intelligently,” and that its clients’ 

had “peace of mind knowing their wealth is absolutely insured.” In calls to prospective 

customers, Spellane and other representatives of Defendants also falsely represented that 

Fisher Capital Group was “the largest wealth preservation firm in North America” and 

that it specialized in “getting clients into fully insured positions so that they do not lose 

their money.” 

4. Each of these statements was materially false and misleading. In reality, 

Fisher Capital Group was not a wealth preservation firm – let alone the largest such firm 

in North America. Instead, Fisher Capital Group was a boiler room-type operation 

orchestrated by Spellane that specialized in bilking elderly and unsophisticated customers

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 2 of 41 PageID #: 2
3

out of their retirement savings. Rather than offering “safe and secure” investments that 

would “guarantee[]” the principal of customers’ investments, Defendants systematically 

and fraudulently deceived customers into purchasing supposedly exclusive, collectible or 

semi-numismatic coins that were worth far less than Defendants led victims to believe. 

Far from preserving or protecting their wealth, victims of Defendants’ scheme routinely 

lost the majority of the value of their investment immediately upon entering into 

transactions with Defendants due to the exorbitant and fraudulent markups charged by 

Defendants.

5. Defendants’ scam is particularly egregious because they preyed on 

vulnerable and elderly victims, and persisted in their fraudulent scheme even after 

(i) multiple firms that served as custodians for its victims’ retirement accounts terminated 

their relationship with Defendants, with one such party warning Spellane that Fisher 

Capital Group’s transactions were “not [] in the best interest of” Fisher Capital Group’s 

customers; and (ii) the CFTC and numerous state regulators commenced lawsuits against 

two prior employers of Spellane for similar conduct that occurred while Spellane was 

employed by those companies. 

6. Rather than discontinue Defendants’ fraudulent scheme, Spellane told 

Fisher Capital Group’s sales staff that Fisher Capital Group was a “pump and dump,” 

meaning that he intended to continue defrauding customers in order to earn quick profits 

until Fisher Capital Group closed or was forcibly shut down. 

7. Defendants have defrauded hundreds of mostly elderly victims into 

investing more than $30 million in Precious Metals. 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 3 of 41 PageID #: 3
4

8. The CFTC brings this lawsuit to protect the investing public and hold 

Defendants accountable for their misconduct. 

9. Precious Metals are commodities under Section 1a(9) of the Commodity 

Exchange Act (“CEA”), 7 U.S.C. § 1a(9).

10. By virtue of this conduct, and as the conduct more fully set forth below, 

Defendants have engaged, are engaging, and/or are about to engage in, either 

intentionally or recklessly, violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the CEA, Section 

6(c)(1) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. § 9(1), and CFTC Regulation 180.1(a)(1)-(3), 17 C.F.R. § 

180.1(a)(1)-(3) (2022).

11. The acts, misrepresentations, omissions, and failures of Spellane and other 

sales representatives, officers, employees, and agents acting for Fisher Capital Group

occurred within the scope of their employment, agency, or office with Fisher Capital

Group. AMS Consulting Solutions LLC and Fisher Capital LLC are therefore liable 

under Section 2(a)(1)(B) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(B), and CFTC Regulation 1.2, 

17 C.F.R. § 1.2 (2022), as a principal for violations of the CEA and CFTC Regulations

by Spellane and other agents and employees of AMS Consulting Solutions LLC and/or

Fisher Capital LLC.

12. Spellane controlled AMS Consulting Solutions and Fisher Capital LLC, 

did not act in good faith, and knowingly induced AMS Consulting Solutions and Fisher 

Capital LLC’s violations of the CEA and CFTC Regulations. As a result, pursuant to 

Section 13(b) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. § 13c(b), Spellane is liable as a controlling person for 

AMS Consulting Solutions and Fisher Capital LLC’s violations of 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) and 17 

C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)-(3).

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 4 of 41 PageID #: 4
5

13. Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 6c and 6d(1) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. §§ 

13a-1, 13a-2(1), the CFTC brings this action to enjoin Defendants’ unlawful acts and 

practices, to compel their compliance with the CEA and CFTC Regulations, and to enjoin 

them from engaging in any commodity-related activity, as set forth below. Plaintiff also 

seeks civil monetary penalties and remedial ancillary relief, including, but not limited to, 

restitution, disgorgement, rescission, pre- and post-judgment interest, and such other 

relief as the Court may deem necessary and appropriate.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

14. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1331 (federal question jurisdiction) and 28 U.S.C. § 1345 (district courts have original 

jurisdiction over civil actions commenced by the United States or by any agency 

expressly authorized to sue by Act of Congress). Section 6c(a) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. § 

13a-1(a), authorizes the CFTC to seek injunctive and other relief against any person 

whenever it appears to the CFTC that such person has engaged, is engaging, or is about to 

engage in any act or practice constituting a violation of any provision of the CEA or any 

rule, regulation, or order thereunder.

15. Venue lies properly in this District pursuant to Section 6c(e) of the CEA, 7 

U.S.C. § 13a-1(e), because Defendants transacted business in this District, and certain 

transactions, acts, practices, and courses of business in violation of the CEA and CFTC 

Regulations occurred, are occurring, or are about to occur within this District, among 

other places, including Defendants’ solicitation of, and transactions with, customers in 

this District.

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 5 of 41 PageID #: 5
6

III. PARTIES

16. Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission is an independent 

federal regulatory agency that is charged by Congress with the administration and 

enforcement of the CEA and the CFTC Regulations promulgated thereunder. 

17. Defendant AMS Consulting Solutions LLC is a Wyoming limited 

liability corporation with its principal place of business in Beverly Hills or Los Angeles, 

California. AMS Consulting Solutions LLC uses or has used the business name Fisher 

Capital. AMS Consulting Solutions LLC has never been registered with the Commission 

in any capacity.

18. Defendant Fisher Capital LLC is a Wyoming limited liability 

corporation with its principal place of business in Beverly Hills or Los Angeles, 

California. Fisher Capital LLC was initially incorporated in Wyoming on June 1, 2020. 

On April 26, 2021 Spellane caused Fisher Capital LLC to be dissolved, and on or about 

the same date, Spellane re-formed Fisher Capital LLC by purchasing Global Access 

International LLC, a Wyoming limited liability corporation that originally was 

incorporated in Wyoming in 2007, and changing its name to Fisher Capital LLC. Upon 

information and belief, Global Access International LLC was a non-operating shell 

corporation unaffiliated with Spellane from its formation until he purchased it in 2021. 

Fisher Capital LLC has never been registered with the Commission in any capacity.

19. Defendant Alexander Spellane is a resident of Los Angeles, California. 

He directly or indirectly owns 100% of Defendants AMS Consulting Solutions LLC and 

Fisher Capital LLC, and has exclusive authority over their business operations. At times, 

Spellane has used the fictitious names “Alexander Overlie” and “Alexander Fisher.” 

Spellane variously held himself out as a member, manager, managing partner, owner, and

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 6 of 41 PageID #: 6
7

Vice President of AMS Consulting Solutions LLC and as the sole owner, Vice President, 

and Chief Executive Officer of Fisher Capital LLC. Spellane has never been registered 

with the Commission in any capacity. 

20. AMS Consulting Solutions LLC and Fisher Capital LLC operated as a 

common enterprise. The entities shared office space, employees, and operational 

resources; were owned and controlled the same individual (Spellane); held themselves 

out as a single operation; and were operated as a single interrelated enterprise to 

perpetuate the fraudulent scheme. 

IV. FACTS

A. Overview of Fisher Capital Group’s Operations

21. From in or about August 2020 through the present, Defendants operated a 

call center in California to solicit elderly and retirement aged customers to invest in 

Precious Metals. 

22. Prior to launching Fisher Capital Group, from approximately March 2019 

to June 2020, Spellane was employed as a telemarketing salesperson at Safeguard Metals 

LLC (“Safeguard”), a company that subsequently was sued by the CFTC and 27 state 

regulatory agencies for perpetrating a nationwide precious metals fraud during the period 

where Spellane was employed at Safeguard.1 Previously, from approximately October 

2017 to March 2019, Spellane worked as a telemarketing salesperson at Chase Metals, 

Inc. (“Chase Metals”), which was sued by the CFTC and 30 state regulatory agencies for 

perpetrating a nationwide precious metals fraud during the period where Spellane was 

employed at Chase Metals.2 

 

1 See Complaint, CFTC et al. v. Safeguard Metals LLC et al, No. 22-cv-681 (C.D. Ca., Feb. 1, 2022). 

2 See Complaint, CFTC et al. v. TMTE, Inc., et al., No. 20-cv-2910 (N.D. Tex., Sept. 22, 2020).

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 7 of 41 PageID #: 7
8

23. Throughout the Relevant Period, Spellane controlled Fisher Capital Group 

and he made all financial, operational, and strategic business decisions for Fisher Capital 

Group. For example, Spellane personally handled purchasing the Precious Metals from 

wholesale and retail dealers that Fisher Capital Group resold to its customers; 

determining which specific coins customers would be directed to purchase; setting the 

prices at which Fisher Capital Group sold Precious Metals to its customers; sourcing 

customer leads; hiring and supervising sales representatives; reviewing and approving 

Fisher Capital Group’s website content; and drafting and approving sales scripts for 

Fisher Capital Group’s sales representatives to follow in communicating with potential 

customers. Spellane also personally solicited customers by phone. 

24. Defendants solicited customers through telephone calls, electronic 

messages, and web-based solicitations, including through advertisements on social media 

platforms, and through Defendants’ website, https://fishercapitalgroup.com.

25. Central to their scheme to defraud, Spellane and Fisher Capital Group’s 

sales representatives focused their fraudulent solicitations on politically conservative and 

Christian customers who were 59 years of age and older, many of whom had no 

experience investing in precious metals. Spellane instructed Fisher Capital Group’s sales 

representatives to concentrate their solicitations on this population in order to gain access 

to their retirement savings, including but not limited to Individual Retirement Accounts 

(“IRA”), simplified employee pension plans, employer sponsored 401(k) or 457(b) plans, 

Thrift Savings Plans, and annuities (collectively, “Traditional Retirement Accounts”). 

26. To perpetrate the scheme, Defendants fraudulently induced customers to

transfer proceeds from Traditional Retirement Accounts, often consisting of funds from 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 8 of 41 PageID #: 8
9

liquidated securities, to newly created accounts with specific self-directed retirement 

account (“SDIRA”) custodians recommended by Defendants for the purchase of Precious 

Metals. Defendants also fraudulently induced some customers to purchase Precious 

Metals using non-retirement assets (“Cash Sales”). 

27. Throughout the scheme, Spellane took steps to conceal his true identity, 

and the identity of many of Fisher Capital Group’s sales representatives, from customers. 

For example: 

a. When communicating with customers, Spellane used the fictitious name 

“Alexander Overlie.” Many of Fisher Capital Group’s sales 

representatives also used fictitious names, including “John Wright,” 

“Kevin Hill,” “Justice Baxter” and “Jacob Anderson.” 

b. Spellane provided corporate email addresses to himself and many of 

Fisher Capital Group’s sales representatives that concealed Spellane’s and 

Fisher Capital Group representatives’ true names. For example, Spellane 

used the email address “alex.overlie@fishercapitalgroup.com.” 

c. Spellane instructed Fisher Capital Group’s sales representatives and some 

third parties to never disclose his true name to customers. For example, in 

January 2021, Spellane instructed a SDIRA custodian that Spellane’s real 

name “should never be displayed” to Fisher Capital Group’s customers. 

d. In at least one instance, in June 2022, in response to a direct question from

a prospective customer’s representative, Spellane expressly and falsely 

denied that “Alexander Overlie” was a pseudonym for Alexander 

Spellane. 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 9 of 41 PageID #: 9
10

28. Defendants’ core strategy for profitability was to charge an exorbitant 

markup on sales of Precious Metals, particularly on gold and silver coins that Defendants 

claimed were collectible, exclusive or “semi-numismatic.” 

29. Physical gold and silver coins3fall into three general categories: (i) 

bullion; (ii) numismatic; and (iii) semi-numismatic. 

a. Bullion coins are valued based upon the prevailing spot market price 

of their precious metals content (“melt value”). 

b. Numismatic coins are rare, of limited availability, and sought after 

by specialized collectors, and so have a value substantially more 

than, and not primarily dependent on, the prevailing market price of 

the metal contained in the coin. Unlike bullion coins, the value of 

numismatic coins is highly dependent upon the specific 

characteristics of an individual specimen, such as the mintage year, 

condition, provenance, and mint mark. In general, the market for 

numismatic coins is less liquid, and has a significantly larger spread 

between bid and ask prices, than the market for bullion coins.

c. Semi-numismatic coins are claimed to exhibit both bullion and 

numismatic traits, such that their value is derived from the precious 

metal content, with some additional premium due to their limited 

circulation and recognized exclusive or collectible value. 

30. Defendants commonly sold bullion coins in the form of the following gold 

and silver coins:

a. The 1/4 oz Gold United States Mint American Eagle;

b. The 1/10 oz Gold United States Mint American Eagle;

c. The 1/4 oz Gold Royal Canadian Mint Maple Leaf;

d. The 1/20 oz Gold Royal Canadian Mint Maple Leaf; and

e. The 1 oz Silver United States Mint American Eagle.

 

3 Within the precious metals industry, the term “coins” refers to precious metals that are issued by a 

sovereign mint and are legal tender. Physical bullion also may be purchased in other forms, including 

rounds (which physically resemble coins but are not legal tender) and bars. 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 10 of 41 PageID #: 10
11

31. Defendants sold a wide variety of different coins that they characterized as 

semi-numismatic, including: 

a. A variety of 5 oz Silver United States Mint “America the 

Beautiful” coins (e.g. Bombay Hook, Weir Farm, American Samoa

National Park, Salt River Bay National Park);

b. A variety of 1.5 oz Silver Royal Canadian Mint “Wildlife Series” 

coins (e.g., Arctic Fox, Polar Bear & Cub, Cougar, Gyrfalcon, 

Grizzly Bear, Orca, Bison and Snowy Owl);

c. The 5 oz Silver Perth Mint Australian Silver Lunar Ox;

d. The 1/2 oz Silver Perth Mint Australian Battle of the Coral Sea;

e. The 1.5 oz Silver Perth Mint Australian Bottlenose Dolphin;

f. The 1 oz Silver Scottsdale Mint Cayman Islands Marlin;

g. The 1/2 oz Gold Royal Canadian Mint Polar Bear;

h. A variety of 1/4 oz Gold Royal Canadian Mint “Wildlife Series” 

coins (e.g., Arctic Fox, Polar Bear and Cub, Gyrfalcon, Bighorn 

Sheep); and

i. The 1/4 oz Gold Saint Helena Rose Crown Guinea.

32. In furtherance of the scheme, beginning in or about July 2020, Defendants

sought to establish business relationships with (i) SDIRA custodians; (ii) Precious Metals 

wholesale and retail companies that could supply Precious Metals for Defendants to resell 

to their own customers; and (iii) depository companies to store Precious Metals on behalf 

of Fischer Capital Group and its customers.

4

In connection with those efforts, Spellane 

intentionally or recklessly provided materially false or misleading information to certain 

of these companies. 

 

4 Pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 408(m), Precious Metals owned in SDIRA accounts must be 

held in the custody of a bank or an IRS-approved non-bank trustee (“depository”). 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 11 of 41 PageID #: 11
12

33. On July 20, 2020, Spellane, on behalf of Fisher Capital Group, submitted 

by email a completed “Dealer Questionnaire” to a SDIRA Custodian (“SDIRA Custodian 

1”). In that questionnaire, in response to SDIRA Custodian 1’s request for a list of 

“relevant businesses you currently work with (suppliers, depositories, etc.),” Spellane 

falsely listed the names of a well-known metals wholesale firm (“Supplier 1”) and three 

SDIRA custodians that were competitors of SDIRA Custodian 1. In fact, at the time of 

Spellane’s email, Defendants did not have a business relationship with any of the 

companies that Spellane identified. Indeed, Spellane had first contacted Supplier 1 to 

inquire about establishing a business relationship only days earlier, and Spellane was 

informed, prior to his submission of a Dealer Questionnaire to SDIRA Custodian 1, that 

Supplier 1 would not conduct business with Defendants prior to conducting a compliance 

review, which was ongoing. Ultimately, after completing its compliance review, 

Supplier 1 informed Spellane that it would not do business with Defendants. 

34. On August 12, 2020, Spellane emailed a depository company

(“Depository Company 1”) attaching an application for AMS Consulting Solutions LLC 

to obtain a commercial account at that depository. In the application, Spellane falsely 

represented that AMS Consulting Solutions LLC’s primary compliance department 

contact was “Justice Baxter.” In fact, AMS Consulting Solutions had no compliance 

department at the time, and “Justice Baxter” was a fictitious name used by a salesperson 

at Fisher Capital Group. 

B. Defendants Fraudulently Induced Elderly Customers to Transfer 

Funds From Traditional Retirement Accounts and Savings Accounts

For the Purpose of Purchasing Precious Metals

35. Defendants’ sales process, which was devised by Spellane, generally 

followed a standardized format. On a daily basis, Fisher Capital Group distributed lists 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 12 of 41 PageID #: 12
13

of potential customers or “leads” to its sales representatives. Using scripts that had been 

approved by Spellane, Fisher Capital Group’s sales representatives contacted leads by 

telephone in order to begin the process of persuading them to purchase Precious Metals. 

Typically, the initial outreach was conducted by less experienced sales representatives, 

who were referred to as an “Opener” or “Dialer.” If the potential customer was receptive 

to the Opener’s pitch, then Spellane or another sales representative, referred to as a 

“Closer,” generally was brought in to continue the process of soliciting the customer. 

36. Spellane recognized that prospective customers would (rightly) be wary 

upon receipt of a cold-call from an unknown Precious Metals dealer that lacked any 

significant operating history and was recommending that customers invest their life 

savings into particular Precious Metals that it was marketing. As a result, Spellane 

developed a sales process that employed fraud and deception to gain customers’ trust.

37. Affinity-Based Lies. Fisher Capital Group’s sales representatives were 

directed by Spellane to not disclose at the outset of calls to prospective customers that 

Fisher Capital Group was a precious metals dealer, or that the purpose of the call was to 

solicit the recipient to purchase precious metals. Instead, at Spellane’s direction, 

Defendants employed strategies throughout the scheme to gain customers’ trust based on

representations of shared political and religious affinity. For example, Fisher Capital 

Group sales representatives – including those who were not Christian or conservative –

were coached by Spellane to build trust with customers by claiming to be Christian and 

conservative. At times, Fisher Capital Group’s sales scripts explicitly suggested that 

affinity-based representations should be used to reassure prospective customers who (like 

virtually every one of Fisher Capital Group’s customers) had never heard of the firm. For 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 13 of 41 PageID #: 13
14

example, one sales script specified the following response to a customer who asks “Fisher 

What?”: “You’ve seen our ads before. Big supporters of [particular conservative news 

personalities].” Another script reflected that if a customer was concerned that Fisher 

Capital Group was a “scam,” the sales representative could offer a stock response that 

included the statement: “My mother raised me with Christian Conservative values.” 

38. These affinity-based tactics included intentionally or recklessly making 

materially false and misleading statements and material omissions to prospective 

customers about Fisher Capital Group’s and its sales representatives’ connections to and 

relationships with conservative television and radio programs and media personalities,

including but not limited to the following:

a. Falsely representing that the purpose of Fisher Capital Group’s call 

was to conduct a survey of listeners of particular conservative 

television and radio programs, notwithstanding that the sham survey 

was a ruse to conceal the true purpose of the sales solicitation call;

b. Falsely representing that Fisher Capital had “teamed up with 

conservative news outlets to warn conservatives about the coming 

retirement crisis”;

c. Falsely representing that “Alex Overlie” (a fictitious name used by 

Spellane) had appeared on Fox News;

d. Falsely representing that “Justice Baxter” (a fictitious name used by a 

Fisher Capital Group salesperson) had “worked alongside” particular 

conservative television and radio personalities, had “produced many 

campaigns” for a conservative television program, and was 

“preparing to go on” a conservative radio personality’s program;

e. Falsely representing that Fisher Capital Group was calling to express 

gratitude for the customer being a listener of certain conservative 

personalities’ radio programs, and to offer a free retirement protection 

guide to “our listeners and supporters”; 

f. Falsely representing that the purpose of the call was because “we 

create content for the supporters and listeners of” particular 

conservative television and radio programs.

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 14 of 41 PageID #: 14
15

39. Lies Suggesting Fisher Capital Would Recommend Safe and Secure 

Investments That Were in its Customers’ Best Interest. Building upon their efforts to 

garner customers’ misplaced trust through claims of shared political and religious 

affinity, Spellane and Fisher Capital Group made materially false and misleading 

statements and omissions intentionally and recklessly throughout the scheme to convey to 

customers that Fisher Capital Group’s main concern was customers’ financial security, 

and that it would offer safe and secure investments that were in its customers’ best 

interest. For example, at times during the Relevant Period, Fisher Capital’s website 

contained the following statements: 

a. Fisher Capital Group’s “Mission Is to Provide Retirees A Secure & 

Wealthy Life” and “Help Retirees Secure Their Financial Future”;

b. “Working with Fisher Capital Group will help secure your nest egg”;

c. “We Are Committed to Your Wealth”; 

d. “Wealth Protection: We focus on fully liquid assets that are guaranteed on 

your principal. Our clients have peace of mind knowing their wealth is 

absolutely insured”;

e. “Self-Directed IRAs put you in full and complete control of your money 

with assistance from a team of experts to take advantage of buying a 

diversity of all IRS approved assets, in addition to traditional assets”;

f. “Our top priority is helping you invest safely and intelligently, especially 

during these times of economic instability”;

g. “Talk With Our Experts: Secure your financial future and live worry-free 

for life”;

h. “Lightning fast account set up will get you out of harm’s way within days 

not months. Our dedicated account executives are there for you every step 

of the way”;

i. “Fisher Capital is dedicated to offering you best in class service to help 

you achieve your goals. Our custodial and client relationships are a result 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 15 of 41 PageID #: 15
16

of our values. We believe in family, legacy and integrity. Our experienced 

staff and IRA team are committed to making it a seamless transition for 

you”;

j. “Your knowledge, our priority. We help our clients understand how 

precious metals can secure your future. With a team of industry veterans,

our unparalleled knowledge will ensure your long-term security and 

conviction”;

k. “Precious Metals get you away from the fiat currency system and into the 

safest investment for you and your family”;

l. “Precious metals have always been trusted as a safe and secure 

investment.”

40. Spellane and Fisher Capital Group representatives repeated these or 

similar misrepresentations in telephonic and email solicitations. In phone calls, for 

example, Spellane represented to customers, in words or substance, that he was a wealth 

protection expert who wanted to help elderly clients “get out of harm’s way” and into a 

position where they were “bulletproof.” In response to a customer who questioned his 

own competence to personally manage a SDIRA account, Spellane offered the false 

reassurance that “Just because it’s self-directed doesn’t mean you’re alone. That’s why 

I’m here. I help clients manage these accounts.” 

41. Spellane also misrepresented and omitted material facts regarding how 

Fisher Capital Group earned its profits. For example, in or about August 2020, in 

response to a customer who asked whether Spellane was soliciting him to “move my 

funds with you [because] there’s a lot of commission involved,” Spellane stated that the 

way Fisher Capital Group makes its money “is through long term relationships that have 

been successful for my clients, that stay with me forever.” Spellane added that unlike 

annuity salesmen who “lock your money in some contract . . . and they make like 8% off 

you,” Fisher Capital did not earn its profits through “getting a big payday” when 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 16 of 41 PageID #: 16
17

customers first invested. Those statements were false and misleading because Fisher 

Capital Group did not profit based on its customers’ success. Rather, the vast majority if 

not all of Fisher Capital Group’s profits were earned immediately upon its sale of 

Precious Metals to newly defrauded customers due to the exorbitant markups charged by 

Defendants (which were markedly higher than the 8% figure Spellane referenced). The 

success of customers was thus inversely related to Fisher Capital Group’s own 

profitability. 

42. In sales scripts provided to Fisher Capital Group’s sales representatives, 

Openers were directed to introduce Spellane and other Closers to potential customers as 

someone who has “been doing great things for our clients for a long time” and directed to 

say that the Closer “really has a heart of gold and a purpose to serve” and “I have the 

utmost trust he will take care of you.” Sales scripts also directed Fisher Capital Group’s 

sales representatives to ask for information about clients’ current retirement accounts on 

the pretext that Fisher Capital Group would use its expertise to give clients a free 

consultation, and offer a free “risk assessment” and tailored recommendations for 

“physical tangible assets . . .that best fits your needs.” In at least one instance, a sales 

script reflected that a sales representative should say “typically I don’t jump on these 

types of calls. I’ve got people that do that . . . I don’t need this account, and I do this 

because I care, because I saw people lose back in 2008.” 

43. Each of the above statements on Fisher Capital Group’s website, in 

telephonic and email solicitations, and in call scripts falsely conveyed that Defendants 

would offer safe and secure investments that were in its customer’s best interest. 

Spellane and Fisher Capital Group knew or recklessly disregarded that each of the above 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 17 of 41 PageID #: 17
18

statements is false or misleading. Spellane and Fisher Capital Group did not, and never 

intended to, help customers invest safely and intelligently, or help retirees secure their 

financial future, or otherwise recommend investments that best suited the customer’s 

needs. Rather, Fisher Capital Group’s business model was to pressure customers to 

invest the entirety of their retirement account in overpriced Precious Metals so as to 

maximize Fisher Capital Group’s own profits at the expense of customers’ long-term

financial security. Nor did Fisher Capital Group focus on “fully liquid assets that are 

guaranteed on [customers’] principal.” Rather, Fisher Capital Group pushed customers to 

buy overpriced supposedly semi-numismatic coins that were less liquid than bullion 

coins, and offered no guarantee of preserving customers’ principal. Indeed, in reality, the 

only guarantee was that upon making a purchase with Fisher Capital Group, virtually 

every one of its customers would suffer immediate and dramatic losses on their 

investment. 

44. Lies about Fisher Capital Group’s Business. To further build trust and 

establish credibility with customers, Spellane, and other Fisher Capital Group sales 

representatives acting at his direction, systematically made materially false and 

misleading statements and omissions intentionally or recklessly about Fisher Capital 

Group’s business, including its size, history, services, and employees. For example, 

Defendants’ sales scripts, website, and telephonic solicitations included, in words or 

substance, the following statements: 

a. Fisher Capital Group was a “multi-billion dollar firm,” had “done 

amazing things for our clients,” and had a “proven track record of 

success” (when, in reality, Fisher Capital Group had not yet 

completed a single transaction at the time the statement was first 

made, has never been a “multi-billion dollar firm,” and virtually all of 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 18 of 41 PageID #: 18
19

its clients from inception to the present have suffered significant 

losses);

b. Fisher Capital Group was “the largest wealth protection firm in North 

America,” “the largest gold and silver IRA company in the nation,” 

“the number one wealth preservation firm in the nation,” “the largest 

conservative and Christian owned wealth preservation firms in the 

country” and “the #1 Precious Metals Company [sic] in the United 

States” (with no basis for these assertions);

c. Fisher Capital Group is well known, has “been around for a very long 

time” and had been in business since 2007 (with no basis for the 

assertion that Fisher Capital Group was well known, and omitting to 

disclose that although Spellane had formed AMS Consulting Group 

in 2019 and then subsequently purchased an older inactive shell 

corporation that he renamed Fisher Capital LLC, Fisher Capital 

Group’s business had no customers and was not an operating business 

until 2020);

d. Fisher Capital Group had a “research department” with “60 years of 

combined experience” (when, in reality, upon information and belief, 

Fisher Capital Group did not have a research department);

e. Fisher Capital Group had “thousands and thousands of clients” 

(when, in reality, Fisher Capital Group had less than 150 clients at the 

time of the statement);

f. Fisher Capital Group’s representatives were busy with inbound calls 

from potential customers (in reality, the overwhelming majority of 

Fisher Capital Group’s customers were contacted via outgoing cold 

calls);

g. Representation that “most conservatives are choosing to work with us 

exclusively” (with no basis for this assertion);

h. Fisher Capital Group was “an exclusive firm” (with no basis for this 

assertion);

i. Fisher Capital Group’s sales representatives were licensed or certified

(with no basis for this assertion);

j. Spellane had been helping clients protect their wealth for “over 25 

years” and had helped people in 2008 to “get out of the market and 

into an insurable position” (when, in reality, Spellane was only 27 

years old at the time of these statements, and his experience did not 

remotely meet this description); 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 19 of 41 PageID #: 19
20

k. Spellane worked for a “department” of Fisher Capital Group that 

“focuses on alternative investments that are guaranteed and insured 

on your principal” (when, in reality, Fisher Capital Group had less 

than ten employees at the time, has never had a department that 

focused on investments that guarantee or insure customers’ principal, 

and aside from telemarking sales representatives employed only a 

single employee, who was a clerical worker); 

l. Fisher Capital Group “help[s] folks acquire physical assets. Whether 

that’s things like private equity, real estate, or physical gold and 

silver, those are things that we would help you with” (in reality, 

Fisher Capital Group’s sole line of business was selling Precious 

Metals);

m. Spellane was able to “see what performs well and what doesn’t, and 

really how the markets move” because he managed a self-directed 

account with “hundreds of millions of dollars in different asset 

classes” (with no basis for this assertion);

n. Spellane was “a complete expert” on wealth protection or financial 

matters (when, in reality, Spellane had a high school education and 

his only relevant work experience was as a telemarketing 

salesperson);

o. References to Fisher Capital Group’s “commercials on TV” (when, in 

reality, upon information and belief, Fisher Capital Group had no 

television advertisements). 

p. Representations by a Fisher Capital Group sales representative 

claiming “I work financial terminals 12 hours a day, 6 days a week,

because I eat sleep and breathe financial news . . . My firm pays 

extreme dollar for information not a lot of people have access to” 

(with no basis for this assertion).

q. Spellane manages “over $300 million in business,” which he grew 

over a period of 20 years, one Fisher Capital Group sales 

representative manages “a book of business that’s worth $250 million 

dollars” and a second sales representative has a “book of business 

that’s over $150 million [] in precious metals” (with no basis for these

assertions);

r. Use of fictitious client testimonials on Fisher Capital Group’s 

website.

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 20 of 41 PageID #: 20
21

45. To further promote Fisher Capital Group’s business and gain customers’ 

trust, Spellane arranged and paid for the publication of a book written by a Fisher Capital 

Group Sales representative under the pseudonym “Justice Baxter,” which was distributed 

to some of Fisher Capital’s customers and prospective customers. That book represents 

that Baxter had made “a small fortune during the dot com bubble,” “sounded a public 

warning before the 2008 crash, having witnessed behind the scenes greed and corruption 

within the banking system,” and was “a world-renowned authority on free market 

economics.” Each of these statements is false. 

46. After gaining prospective customers’ trust, Fisher Capital Group’s 

representatives were directed by Spellane to pressure customers to (i) open a new SDIRA

account at a custodian recommended by Defendants; and (ii) transfer proceeds from the 

customer’s Traditional Retirement Accounts, often consisting of funds from liquidated 

securities, into the customer’s newly created SDIRA account. 

47. To induce customers to do so, Spellane and Fisher Capital Group 

consistently and systematically employed false and misleading statements and deceptive 

tactics designed to stoke customers’ fear of economic collapse and scare customers into 

erroneously believing that their retirement accounts could be frozen or seized in the event 

of a stock market decline. 

48. False Representations that Retirement Accounts Will Be Frozen. In 

telephonic solicitations through at least February 2022, Spellane and Fisher Capital 

Group routinely and falsely represented to customers that the “Money Market Reform 

Law” allowed banks and brokerage firms to permanently freeze retirement accounts in 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 21 of 41 PageID #: 21
22

the event of a market downturn. For example, Defendants’ sales scripts and telephonic 

solicitations included the following statements:

a. “Did you see the BIG NEWS?! It’s talking about this monetary policy 

passed by the Obama Administration called the U.S. Money Market 

Reform Act. Let me tell you, what it does – it now allows institutions like 

Fidelity, Edward Jones, and Vanguard as examples, what they can now do 

is legally freeze you out of the account during a market crash, they can 

liquidate the funds inside, and use your money to bail themselves out to 

avoid going bankrupt.”

b. “The information you accessed talks about the deep state confiscating 

retirement accounts such as 401ks and IRAs . . . The Federal Reserve is 

coming out with some CRAZY announcements! And Retirement 

accounts are being placed DIRECTLY in the line of fire for a BANKING 

FREEZE!!!”;

c. The Money Market Reform Act is a new “sneaky” law enacted “under the 

rug” at the behest of big banks as part of “an agenda, a plan that they 

would enact during the next financial crisis” so that “they can legally 

freeze your account and take your money.” 

d. The law was passed by President Obama “right before” he left office and 

“they passed these sneaky laws right under our noses. They didn’t think 

anybody would find out.” 

e. “Most conservatives are calling in because their [sic] concerned that Wall 

Street brokerage firms will freeze your retirement account and take your 

money to avoid going belly up, how does that make you feel?” 

f. “We see the heads of the largest banks right now warning about accounts 

being frozen”;

g. “Millions of Americans already had their accounts frozen” or had been 

“locked out of their 401k’s” as a result of the new law. 

h. “Does it make sense to have 100% of your life savings in an uninsured 

position that can be frozen? Of course not.” 

i. “What most of our clients are doing is rolling over . . . into a . . . Self 

Directed IRA and it’s because when you rollover it’ll be FDIC insured 

bank guaranteed under your name instead of being frozen in a money 

market account. . .”

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 22 of 41 PageID #: 22
23

49. Defendants knew or were reckless in disregarding that these 

representations were false and misleading. In fact, there was no law that allowed banks 

or brokerage firms to freeze investors’ retirement accounts, nor had millions of 

Americans had their accounts frozen. The “law” referenced by Spellane and Fisher 

Capital Group is actually a 2014 regulation promulgated by the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (“SEC”), Money Market Fund Reform Amendments to Form PF, 70 Fed. 

Reg. 47,736 (Aug. 14, 2014). That regulation was not enacted by President Obama; was 

not enacted shortly before he left office, and was not done in secret. Defendants failed to 

disclose that regulation applied only to money market fund investments and it allowed 

liquidity fees and redemption gates to be implemented for money market investments 

temporarily under certain rare circumstances, and furthermore, that liquidation follows 

when redemptions are permanently suspended thereby allowing investors to recover 

funds. 

50. To amplify their false warnings of account freezes, and to create a false 

sense of urgency, Spellane and Fisher Capital Group sales representatives told 

prospective customers that the United States was anticipated to imminently suffer a 

market crash or recession. For example, Defendants’ sales scripts and solicitations by 

phone and email included the following statements:

a. “The rumor on the Street is that this market is ready to sell-off by end of 

Jan[.] according to all these financial institutions”;

b. “You probably already know the markets [sic] going to crash in the next 

couple of months”;

c. “Most folks are concerned about the dollar devaluing and the market 

crashing within the next few months”;

d. “Most financial experts say the dollar will crash very soon”;

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 23 of 41 PageID #: 23
24

e. “Do you remember back in 2008, people lost 40-60% overnight being in 

the market. . . The average rate of return in the stock market is about 7%. 

Right now you’re risking losing half of [your] money to get a 7% return. 

It doesn’t make sense for someone of your age to take that kind of risk. . . 

now is the time to get more defensive and protective of what you’ve 

worked hard for . . . something is wrong with the economy right now and 

it could result in your legacy being affected for the rest of your life. . . 

This is going to be a recession like we’ve never seen, and it could even 

turn in to a global depression.”;

f. “From our sources, we can’t see the markets going up much higher”;

g. “It’s turning into a great depression”;

h. The Federal Reserve is “triggering a stress test which is predicting that the 

market could crash above 55% in the next few months.” 

51. Spellane and Fisher Capital knew or were reckless in disregarding that 

these statements were false and misleading and contained material omissions. Each of 

these statements misleadingly fail to disclose that Spellane and Fisher Capital Group’s 

sales representatives were not licensed to provide financial advice and lacked specialized 

financial or economic training. Moreover, references to the possibility that customers 

might lose 40%-60% in the stock market misleadingly failed to disclose that customers 

would be guaranteed to lose a substantial amount of the value of their investments in 

their Traditional Retirement Accounts if they took Fisher Capital Group’s advice and 

purchased grossly overpriced Precious Metals in an SDIRA account. Finally, Fisher 

Capital Group’s representation that the Federal Reserve was “predicting” a 55% market 

crash was false and misleading because it omits to disclose that the cited figure 

represented a hypothetical decline in equity prices utilized by the Federal Reserve Board 

solely for the purpose of annually assessing the strength and resilience of banking 

organizations under one of several potential scenarios, and the Federal Reserve Board 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 24 of 41 PageID #: 24
25

expressly admonishes that each such scenario “does not represent a forecast of the 

Federal Reserve.”5 

52. False Representations Regarding Insurance. In solicitations of potential 

customers through at least February 2022, Spellane and Fisher Capital Group 

intentionally or recklessly routinely misrepresented, as a purported rationale for 

customers to establish SDIRA accounts to invest in Precious Metals, that Traditional 

Retirement Accounts are uninsured. These statements are false and misleading, and 

contain material omissions, in multiple respects. In reality, investor protections and 

insurance are offered through the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) for 

many types of securities investments in Traditional Retirement Accounts, some 

Traditional Retirement Account cash holdings are covered by insurance through the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), and many brokerage firms offer 

optional additional insurance for their clients in excess of SIPC insurance limits. 

Moreover, Spellane and Fisher Capital Group omitted to disclose that the Precious Metals 

that it sold were not insured by SIPC or FDIC. 

53. Efforts to Dissuade Customers from Consulting with Independent Third 

Parties. As a further element of Defendants’ fraudulent scheme, in order to dissuade

customers from conducting independent research or consulting with financial advisors or 

other third parties, Spellane instructed Fisher Capital Group’s sales representatives to 

attempt to keep customers on the phone continuously until the customer agreed to open a 

SDIRA account and had provided Fisher Capital Group with sufficient personal 

 

5 See Federal Reserve Board, Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test Publications: 2021 Stress Test Scenarios 

(February 2021), available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/stress-test-scenarios-february2021.htm.

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 25 of 41 PageID #: 25
26

information for Fisher Capital Group representatives to prepare a SDIRA account 

application for the customer’s signature. As a result, initial calls with Customers 

frequently lasted an hour or more. 

54. As a further tactic to dissuade customers from consulting with independent 

third parties, Spellane and Fisher Capital Group sought to preemptively cast doubt on the 

expertise and motivations of customers’ financial advisors and retirement account 

custodians. For example, in call scripts, Fisher Capital Group representatives were 

directed to tell customers that financial advisors had not informed their customers about 

the risks associated with Traditional Retirement Accounts because “if they did, they 

would lose their job,” and that financial advisors were supposedly legally barred from 

advising their clients to “move to cash.” 

C. Defendants Fraudulently Charged Exorbitant Price Markups on 

Precious Metals

55. After a customer had transferred funds from their Traditional Retirement 

Account to a newly-created SDIRA account (or for Cash Purchases, after a customer 

transmitted funds to Fisher Capital Group), Spellane and Fisher Capital Group proceeded 

to execute Defendants’ core strategy of selling fraudulently overpriced Precious Metals. 

56. This component of the sales process typically occurred in several stages. 

First, Defendants would conduct a non-recorded call with the customer, in which the 

customer was notified that they would be receiving a call from the “Fisher Capital Trade 

Desk” on a recorded line to conduct a “trade.” Customers were told that they needed to 

answer “yes” to every question on the recording, and that if they gave any other answer 

or asked any questions, they would have to start over. 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 26 of 41 PageID #: 26
27

57. Next, Defendants contacted the customer again via a recorded telephone 

line. That recorded call, which was typically only a few minutes in length, was referred 

to internally by Defendants as the “Coin Call” (also referred to as the “Trade Call.”). 

58. Defendants employed a variety of false and deceptive tactics, including 

materially false and misleading statements and omissions, both before, during, and after 

the Coin Call in order to mislead customers about the value of the Precious Metals being 

sold and Fisher Capital Group’s markup. 

59. One such tactic was to provide favorable information to customers relating 

to bullion coins, without disclosing that the information was inapplicable to the 

supposedly exclusive or collectible semi-numismatic coins into which Fisher Capital 

Group directed the vast majority of customers’ funds. For example, in emails to 

prospective customers, Fisher Capital Group emphasized that “Gold is one of the most 

highly traded financial assets, with low transaction costs and universal acceptance.” That 

statement misleadingly omits to disclose that Fisher Capital Group overwhelmingly 

directed customers’ investments into lesser-known supposedly collectible seminumismatic coins that are not a “highly traded financial asset,” and involve (at least when 

sold by Fisher Capital Group) huge transaction costs for the customer. 

60. Defendants also materially misrepresented to customers the value of seminumismatic coins by representing in words or substance that such coins were rare, 

special, exclusive, or collectible and therefore had a value substantially above their melt 

value. Spellane and Fisher Capital Group knew or recklessly disregarded that the 

supposedly semi-numismatic coins sold by Fisher Capital Group were not rare, were not 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 27 of 41 PageID #: 27
28

exclusive to Fisher Capital Group, and had little if any numismatic or semi-numismatic 

value. 

61. Defendants materially misrepresented to customers that semi-numismatic 

coins were a better investment than bullion coins, and falsely assured customers in words 

or substance that the customer would likely earn substantial profits due to projected 

appreciation in the value of such coins. In reality, as Defendants knew or recklessly 

disregarded, purchasing grossly overpriced coins at prices that ranged from at least 43% 

to more than 200% of the market value of such coins guaranteed that customers would 

suffer immediate and substantial losses. No factual basis existed to project that 

customers would ever earn a profit on such investments, or that such investments would 

perform better than bullion coins. For example, in or about March 2021, Spellane falsely 

told a customer that by converting his Traditional Retirement Account into Precious 

Metals, he could expect to double his money within six months to one year because the 

price of gold and silver would rise. In fact, as Spellane knew or recklessly disregarded, 

the customer instantly lost more than half of the value of his retirement account upon 

transacting with Fisher Capital Group because Spellane directed virtually all of the 

customer’s retirement funds into grossly overpriced supposedly semi-numismatic coins at 

markups ranging from 137% to 145%. 

62. In sales scripts and telephonic solicitations to customers, Defendants 

misleadingly touted the favorable pricing that a customer would receive on bullion coins, 

while intentionally and misleadingly failing to disclose that the markup that the customer 

would be charged on supposedly semi-numismatic, exclusive or collectible coins would 

be orders of magnitude higher. 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 28 of 41 PageID #: 28
29

63. For example, Fisher Capital Group represented in a verbal pitch to a 

customer that if the customer were to acquire silver, Fisher Capital Group “charge[s] a 

2% cost over spot price for that bullion, and that’s it. There’s no cost to hold it. There’s 

no cost to sell it.” That statement was false and misleading because it materially 

understated the price that Fisher Capital Group charged on bullion silver coins,6and

failed to disclose that Fisher Capital Group directed the vast majority of all customer 

funds into supposedly non-bullion coins it characterized as semi-numismatic, at markups 

frequently exceeding 150%. The statement that there is “no cost to hold” precious metals 

also is false, because SDIRA custodians and depository institutions impose significant 

fees and costs to store Precious Metals in an IRA account. 

64. As Defendants knew, Fisher Capital Group paid its sales representatives a 

commission of 8% (split between the Opener and Closer) on the total amount charged to 

customers when coins were purchased; thus Fisher Capital Group’s transactions with 

customers included markups of more than (and typically much more than) 8%. 

65. In a telephonic solicitation in or about June 2022, Spellane employed a 

similar tactic by emphasizing the favorable pricing that a customer would be offered on 

particular bullion coins, while failing to disclose that the markup that the customer would 

be charged on supposedly semi-numismatic coins would be orders of magnitude higher. 

66. Similarly, a Fisher Capital Group sales script stated: “Where we make 

money is when you make the decision to hold real tangible assets[,] for example[,] when 

 

6 Fisher Capital Group at times charged a markup of more than 7% on silver bullion coins over its own 

cost. However, those prices at times translated to a markup over spot that exceeded 40% on silver bullion 

coins because Fisher Capital Group acquired bullion coins from other vendors who had already marked up 

those coins. 

 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 29 of 41 PageID #: 29
30

you decide to move to Physical Gold and Silver we make an industry standard of 1-3% 

on Physical Bullion on that one transaction and that’s it” (capitalization in original). That 

statement was materially false and misleading because, as Defendants’ knew, Fisher 

Capital Group profited by systematically directing the vast majority of all customer funds 

into supposedly non-bullion coins, at markups frequently exceeding 150%. 

67. Defendants’ core strategy, however, was to exploit their customers’

erroneous belief (induced through Defendants’ misrepresentations earlier in the sales 

process) that Fisher Capital Group was a well-known firm that shared their political and 

religious affiliations and was committed to acting in its clients’ best interest. In that 

regard, Spellane and Fisher Capital Group trained its sales representatives that: “if the 

client feels that you don’t have their best interest [in mind] then you and [the] client will 

be butting heads about why the client does not want the coins that you recommended 

them to buy,” but if the initial portions of the solicitations are done effectively then the 

Coin Call “is much easier.” In other words, Spellane and Fisher Capital Group’s strategy 

was to fraudulently induce vulnerable elderly and retirement-aged customers to believe 

that Defendants would act in customers’ best interest, so that during the Coin Call, 

Spellane and Fisher Capital Group could defraud those customers out of their retirement 

funds with ease. 

68. In advance of the recorded Coin Call, Spellane determined the various 

coins that would be sold to the relevant customer, along with the prices that the customer 

would be charged for each coin. To benefit Defendants’ own interest, Spellane generally 

directed the vast majority of each customers’ funds into supposedly collectible seminumismatic coins that Defendants claimed had numismatic or semi-numismatic value. 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 30 of 41 PageID #: 30
31

Until approximately December 2021, Defendants charged an average markup of 

approximately 140% over their own cost on semi-numismatic coins. After December 

2021, Defendants charged an average markup of approximately 43% over their own cost 

on semi-numismatic coins. On information and belief, Spellane made that change in or 

about December 2021 after receiving notice of governmental investigations into Fisher 

Capital Group’s operations.

69. To distract customers and conceal the fraud, Spellane generally directed a 

small fraction (typically less than 5%) of each customer’s funds into bullion coins at 

prices close to Fisher Capital Group’s cost. 

70. Spellane directed Fisher Capital Group’s sales representatives to not 

inform customers in advance of the recorded Coin Call of the price that they would be 

paying for any particular supposedly semi-numismatic coins. Instead, Fisher Capital 

Group’s representatives were directed by Spellane to only explain in general terms the 

concept of bullion, semi-numismatic and numismatic coins, while persuading customers 

that semi-numismatic coins would best serve the customer’s investment objectives. 

71. Next, Defendants’ sales representatives would contact the customer on a 

recorded line and verbally state, in rapid succession, the quantity and prices of the various 

coins that the customer would be purchasing. 

72. Notably, the recorded “Coin Call” was typically the very first time that 

Defendants’ customers were told the specific prices, quantities and types of the 

supposedly semi-numismatic coins that they would be sold. Elderly customers – who had 

been duped into believing they were dealing with a reputable and well-known wealth 

preservation firm that would help them achieve financial security – frequently failed to 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 31 of 41 PageID #: 31
32

recognize during Defendants’ rapid-fire Coin Call script that they were being charged 

unconscionably high markups for certain coins. 

73. Following the Coin Call, Spellane contacted the customer’s SDIRA 

custodian to notify the custodian of the customer’s purchase, and request payment to 

Fisher Capital Group. Spellane also arranged for the Precious Metals ordered by the 

customer to be delivered to either (i) the customer’s residence for Cash Sales, or (ii) to a 

depository company, for SDIRA account purchases. In doing so, Fisher Capital Group 

effectively acted as an unnecessary middle-man to add additional mark-up on Precious 

Metals that customers frequently could have purchased themselves from the very same 

online retail vendor or a variety of other sources for a fraction of the cost charged by 

Fisher Capital Group. In many instances, Spellane fulfilled customer orders by simply 

ordering the relevant Precious Metals from other online Precious Metals vendors –

including, at times, well-known online retail vendors that are readily available to the 

general public – and arranging for those vendors to deliver the Precious Metals directly to 

the customer’s residence or the depository account. In other instances, Fisher Capital 

Group purchased Precious Metals from distributors in anticipation of future customer 

orders. 

74. Spellane and Fisher Capital Group took steps to prevent or delay 

customers from realizing that they had been grossly overcharged. For example, Fisher 

Capital Group drafted customers’ SDIRA application forms to designate Fisher Capital 

Group as the customer’s designated representative and specified that SDIRA custodians 

should solely contact Fisher Capital Group, and not the customer themselves, for verbal 

verification when disbursing funds. In addition, until at least approximately April 2022, 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 32 of 41 PageID #: 32
33

Fisher Capital Group’s representatives, at Spellane’s direction, did not send customers 

any written receipt or other confirmation of their purchase. 

75. Throughout the scheme, at least until December 2021, in telephone 

solicitations and on the recorded Coin Calls, Spellane and Fisher Capital Group 

systematically failed to disclose: the total number of ounces of gold or silver purchased 

by customers, the applicable spot price of gold or silver, the markup charged by 

Defendants, or the percentage by which the customers’ Precious Metals would need to 

appreciate for customers to break even. 

76. Until approximately December 2021, the sole written disclosure that 

customers received regarding Fisher Capital Group’s commissions or markups was 

contained in a “Shipping and Transaction Agreement,” which was a nine-page document 

in small print font that was drafted or approved by Spellane. In that document, Spellane 

and Fisher Capital Group deceptively failed to disclose to customers that the average 

markup that Defendants charged on semi-numismatic coins averaged approximately

140%. Instead, the document stated: 

“Fisher Capital’s Precious Metals product quotes to Customer for 

common bullion Precious Metals products (i.e. rounds and bars that 

ordinarily trade in concurrence with the Spot Price for the given 

commodity such as American Eagle coins, Canadian Maple Leaf 

coins, good delivery bars, etc.) are typically four percent (4%) for 

cash, and seven percent (7%) for IRA purchases. These numbers 

are only examples of general ranges and approximations which are 

subject to change for various reasons. Spreads vary based on the 

quantity of purchase, the availability of Precious Metals products, 

market forces such as sudden spikes in demand and the timing of 

transactions, among other things. The actual Spread on any 

transaction could be within – or outside of – the above stated price 

ranges. For instance, proceeds on exclusive and/or Numismatic 

Precious Metals products such as Saint Gaudens, Barber Half 

Dollars (and all other graded, exclusive or collectible Metals 

products) are upwards of twenty percent (20%) and proof products 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 33 of 41 PageID #: 33
34

over twenty three (23%). Spreads for exclusive and Numismatic 

Precious Metals vary on any particular transaction and could be any 

amount within or outside of those ranges.” 

77. Defendants knew, or were reckless in disregarding, that the above 

language misleadingly fails to disclose that Defendants charged uniformly exorbitant

markups, averaging approximately 140%, on supposedly semi-numismatic coins sold 

through approximately December 2021. 

78. Many customers, including elderly persons, never realized that the value 

of their retirement account dropped substantially on the day that they purchased Precious 

Metals from Defendants. Others customers first became concerned when they viewed

statements from their new SDIRA custodians showing that their account values declined 

substantially following their purchase of Precious Metals from Fisher Capital Group. 

79. When customers contacted Fisher Capital Group about the disparity 

between their original investment and the value assigned by SDIRA custodians, Spellane 

and Defendants misleadingly assured customers that that SDIRA custodians considered 

only the melt value of the Precious Metals, and that the value of the customer’s Precious 

Metals was supposedly much higher than valuation specified in the customer’s SDIRA 

statement. This explanation omitted to disclose that, as Defendants knew or recklessly 

disregarded, the resale value of the Precious Metals that Defendants marketed and sold 

was much lower than the prices customers paid for those Precious Metals. Defendants 

also falsely represented to customers that SDIRA statements displayed only the melt 

value of the Precious Metals because it purportedly provided a tax break to the customer. 

80. Due to the acts, omissions and failures of Defendants, at least two SDIRA 

custodians (SDIRA Custodian 1 and SDIRA Custodian 2) terminated their business 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 34 of 41 PageID #: 34
35

relationship with Spellane and Fisher Capital Group in late 2020. In a letter 

communicating that termination to Spellane on or about October 22, 2020, SDIRA 

Custodian 1 stated, in pertinent part, that:

[I]t has come to our attention that certain trades made in accounts 

represented by Fisher Capital appear to not be in the best interest of the 

IRA owner with the values of the accounts being significantly less after 

the trade activity than the values of the accounts prior to the trades.

D. Spellane Controlled the Operations of Fisher Capital Group and Is 

Therefore Liable for Its Actions

81. During the Relevant Period, Spellane was the controlling person of Fisher 

Capital Group (including AMS Consulting LLC and Fisher Capital LLC). Spellane

directly or indirectly held 100% ownership of those companies, and held exclusive 

authority over their business decisions. 

82. As the controlling person, Spellane made all significant business decisions 

on behalf of Fisher Capital Group. He was authorized to make, and did make, personnel 

decisions about hiring and firing of employees. Spellane provided training to Fisher 

Capital Group’s sales representatives, and drafted or approved sales scripts. Spellane 

also determined and set the prices at which Fisher Capital Group sold Precious Metals to 

the public. 

83. During the Relevant Period, Spellane was the only signatory on Fisher 

Capital Group’s bank accounts and served as the only person authorized to enter into 

financial transactions on behalf of Fisher Capital Group. 

84. Spellane did not act in good faith or has knowingly induced Fisher Capital 

Group’s violations of the CEA and Commission Regulations.

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 35 of 41 PageID #: 35
36

V. VIOLATIONS OF THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT AND 

COMMISSION REGULATIONS

COUNT 1

Fraud

FRAUD BY DECEPTIVE DEVICE OR CONTRIVANCE – VIOLATION OF 

SECTION 6(c)(1) OF THE ACT, 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) AND 

REGULATION 180.1(a)(1)–(3), 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)–(3) (2021)

85. Paragraphs 1 through 84 are realleged and incorporated herein by 

reference.

86. 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) makes it unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, to:

[U]se or employ, or attempt to use or employ, in connection with 

any swap, or a contract of sale of any commodity in interstate 

commerce, or for future delivery on or subject to the rules of any 

registered entity, any manipulative or deceptive device or 

contrivance, in contravention of such rules and regulations as the 

Commission shall promulgate by not later than 1 year after [July 

21, 2010, the date of enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 

Reform and Consumer Protection Act] . . . .

87. 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a) provides, in part:

It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, in 

connection with any swap, or contract of sale of any commodity in 

interstate commerce, or contract for future delivery on or subject to 

the rules of any registered entity, to intentionally or recklessly: (1) 

Use or employ, or attempt to use or employ, any manipulative 

device, scheme, or artifice to defraud; (2) Make, or attempt to 

make, any untrue or misleading statement of a material fact or to 

omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the 

statements made not untrue or misleading; (3) Engage, or attempt 

to engage, in any act, practice, or course of business, which 

operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person . . . 

88. By reason of the conduct describe above, Defendants, by and through 

Spellane, and Defendants officers, employees, and agents, directly or indirectly, in 

connection with contracts of sale of commodities in interstate commerce, intentionally or 

recklessly violated 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) and 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)–(3).

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 36 of 41 PageID #: 36
37

89. By reason of the conduct described above, the acts, misrepresentations, 

omissions, and failures of Spellane and other officers, employees, and agents acting for 

Defendants AMS Consulting Solutions and Fisher Capital LLC occurred within the scope 

of their employment, agency, or office with AMS Consulting Solutions and Fisher

Capital LLC. Defendants AMS Consulting Solutions and Fisher Capital LLC are

therefore liable under Section 2(a)(1)(B) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(B), and CFTC 

Regulation 1.2, 17 C.F.R. § 1.2 (2021), as a principal for Spellane’s violations of the 

CEA and CFTC Regulations.

90. Spellane controlled AMS Consulting Solutions and Fisher Capital LLC

and has not acted in good faith or has knowingly induced, directly or indirectly, the acts 

constituting AMS Consulting Solutions and Fisher Capital LLC’s violations alleged in 

this Count. As a result, pursuant to Section 13(b) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. § 13c(b), Spellane

is liable for AMS Consulting Solutions’ and Fisher Capital LLC’s violations of 7 U.S.C. 

§ 9(1) and 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)-(3), as controlling person.

91. Each use or employment or attempted use or employment of any 

manipulative device, scheme, or artifice to defraud; untrue or misleading statement of 

fact, omission of material fact necessary to make statements not untrue or misleading; or 

act of engaging, or attempting to engage, in acts, practices or courses of business that 

operated or would have operated as a fraud or deceit on Defendants’ customers is alleged 

as a separate and distinct violation of 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) and 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)-(3).

VI. RELIEF REQUESTED

WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court, as 

authorized by Section 6c of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1, and pursuant to its own equitable 

powers:

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 37 of 41 PageID #: 37
38

A. Find that Defendants violated Section 6(c)(1) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 9(1), 

and Regulation 180.1(a)(1)–(3), 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)–(3) (2022);

B. Find that Defendant Spellane is liable pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 13c(b) as a 

controlling person for AMS Consulting Solutions’ and Fisher Capital 

LLC’s violations of 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) and 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)–(3);

C. Find that Defendants AMS Consulting Solutions and Fisher Capital LLC

are liable under 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(B), and 17 C.F.R. § 1.2 (2022) as 

principals for the acts, omissions, or failures as alleged herein;

D. Enter an order of permanent injunction enjoining Defendants and any of 

their affiliates, agents, servants, employees, successors, assigns, attorneys, 

and all persons in active concert with them, who receive actual notice of 

such order by personal service or otherwise, from violating 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) 

and 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)–(3); 

E. Enter an order of permanent injunction restraining and enjoining 

Defendants and any of their affiliates, agents, servants, employees, 

successors, assigns, attorneys, and persons in active concert with them,

from directly or indirectly:

1) Trading on or subject to the rules of any registered entity (as that 

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

2) Entering into any transactions involving “commodity interests” (as 

that term is defined in Regulation 1.3, 17 C.F.R. § 1.3 (2021)), or 

precious metals that are commodities, as that term is defined 

herein, for accounts held in the name of any Defendant or for any 

account in which any Defendant has a direct or indirect interest; 

3) Having any commodity interests, or precious metals that are 

commodities, as that term is defined herein, traded on any 

Defendants’ behalf; 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 38 of 41 PageID #: 38
39

4) 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 or precious metals that are 

commodities, as that term is defined herein; 

5) Soliciting, receiving, or accepting any funds from any person for 

the purpose of purchasing or selling any commodity interests; 

6) Applying for registration or claim exemption from registration 

with the Commission in any capacity, or 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) (2021); and/or 

7) Acting as a principal (as that term is defined in Regulation 3.l(a), 

17 C.F.R. § 3.1 (a) (2021)), agent or any other officer or employee 

of any person registered, exempted from registration, or required to 

be registered with the Commission except as provided for in 17 

C.F.R. § 4.14(a)(9).

F. Enter an order directing Defendants to pay a civil monetary penalty 

assessed by the Court, in an amount not to exceed the penalty prescribed 

by Section 6c(d)(1) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(d)(1), as adjusted for 

inflation pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act 

Improvements Act of 2015, Pub. L. 114-74, tit. VII, § 701, 129 Stat. 584,

599–600, see Regulation 143.8, 17 C.F.R. § 143.8 (2022), for each 

violation of the Act and Regulations, as described herein; 

G. Enter an order directing Defendants, as well as any third-party transferee 

and/or successors thereof, to disgorge, pursuant to such procedure as the 

Court may order, all benefits received including, but not limited to, 

salaries, commissions, loans, fees, revenues, and trading profits derived, 

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 39 of 41 PageID #: 39
40

directly or indirectly, from the acts or practices which constituted 

violations of the Act, as described herein, including pre-judgment and 

post-judgment interest;

H. Enter an order directing Defendants and any of their successors, to 

rescind, pursuant to such procedures as the Court may order, all contracts 

and agreements, whether implied or express, entered into between them 

and any customer or investor whose funds and/or assets were received by 

Defendants as a result of the acts and practices which constituted 

violations of the Act, as amended, as described herein;

I. Enter an order directing Defendants, as well as any successors thereof, to 

make full restitution to every person who has sustained losses proximately 

caused by the violations described herein, including pre-judgment and 

post-judgment interest; 

J. Enter an order requiring Defendants to pay costs and fees as permitted by 

28 U.S.C. §§ 1920 and 2413(a)(2); and

K. Enter an order providing such other and further relief as the Court may 

deem necessary and appropriate under the circumstances.

* * *

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 40 of 41 PageID #: 40
41

VIII. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial.

Dated: April 25, 2023 Respectfully submitted,

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

COMMODITY FUTURES 

 TRADING COMMISSION

Manal M. Sultan

Deputy Director

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission

Division of Enforcement

By: /s/ Jacob Mermelstein

Jacob Mermelstein, Trial Attorney

David W. MacGregor, Chief Trial Attorney7

COMMODITY FUTURES

 TRADING COMMISSION

Ted Weiss Federal Office Building 

290 Broadway, Suite 600

New York, NY 10007

Phone: (646) 746-9700

Fax: (646) 746-9938

dmacgregor@cftc.gov

jmermelstein@cftc.gov

 

7 Pro hac vice application to be submitted.

Case 1:23-cv-03121 Document 1 Filed 04/25/23 Page 41 of 41 PageID #: 41