1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

COMMODITY FUTURES 

TRADING COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

RENE LARRALDE, JUAN PABLO 

VALCARCE, BRIAN EARLY, 

ALISHA ANN KINGREY, and 

FUNDSZ,

Defendants.

Case No.:

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL MONETARY 

PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF

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

an independent federal agency, by and through its attorneys hereby alleges as 

follows:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. From at least October 2020 through the present (“Relevant Period”), 

Defendants Rene Larralde, Juan Pablo Valcarce, Brian Early, and Alisha Ann 

Kingrey (collectively, the “Individual Defendants”), individually and as principals

and agents of an unincorporated entity called Fundsz, have fraudulently solicited,

accepted, and pooled potentially millions of dollars of contributions from, as 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 1 of 25 PageID 1
2

claimed by Defendants, more than 14,000 members of the general public

(“participants”) to purportedly trade cryptocurrencies and precious metals in the 

Fundsz “passive income platform” they operated. 

2. Defendants, by and through the Individual Defendants and other 

promoters, have made misrepresentations of material fact when soliciting funds 

from existing and prospective participants, such as falsely claiming that they 

profitably traded cryptocurrency and precious metals, earning on average more 

than 3% per week with the participants’ money, when in fact they did not trade at 

all. Defendants also made other misrepresentations of material fact, including that 

Fundsz had made on time and accurate payments to participants for over seven 

years, and that the prices of cryptocurrencies like bitcoin and ether, also known as 

digital asset commodities, were increasing dramatically during periods in which 

the prices of those coins had actually fallen. And upon receiving subpoenas from 

the Commission, Defendants halted participant withdrawals, took down their social 

media presence, and began a campaign to eliminate Fundsz’s presence on 

Facebook and YouTube.

3. By engaging in this conduct and the conduct further described herein, 

Defendants have engaged, are engaging, or are about to engage in violations of the 

Commodity Exchange Act (“Act”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 1-26 and CFTC Regulations

(“Regulation”), 17 C.F.R. pts. 1-190 (2022), including, but not limited to: the 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 2 of 25 PageID 2
3

employment, or attempted employment, of manipulative or deceptive devices and 

contrivances, in 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) (2022).

4. Unless immediately restrained and enjoined by this Court, Defendants 

are likely to continue engaging in the acts and practices alleged in this Complaint, 

and funds they fraudulently obtained are likely to be misappropriated or otherwise 

dissipated. Accordingly, the CFTC brings this action pursuant to Section 6c of the 

Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1, to enjoin Defendants’ unlawful acts and practices and to 

compel their compliance with the Act. The CFTC also seeks civil monetary 

penalties and remedial ancillary relief, including restitution to defrauded 

participants, disgorgement, pre- and post-judgment interest, and such other 

equitable relief as this Court may deem necessary. 

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 

(codifying federal question jurisdiction) and 28 U.S.C. § 1345 (providing that U.S. 

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). 

In addition, Section 6c(a) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(a), provides that U.S. 

district courts have jurisdiction to hear actions brought by the Commission for 

injunctive and other relief or to enforce compliance with the Act whenever it shall 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 3 of 25 PageID 3
4

appear to the Commission 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 thereunder. 

6. Venue properly lies with this Court pursuant to Section 6c(e) of the 

Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(e), because Defendants transacted business in this District, 

Defendants Valcarce and Larralde reside in this district, and certain of the acts and 

practices in violation of the Act have occurred, are occurring, or are about to occur 

within this District, among other places. 

III. PARTIES

7. Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission is an 

independent federal regulatory agency charged by Congress with administering 

and enforcing the Act and CFTC Regulations. 

8. Defendant Rene Larralde resides in Melbourne, Florida. Larralde

has never been registered with the CFTC in any capacity. Larralde has served as a 

member of the Fundsz Advisory Board throughout the Relevant Period. Larralde 

is identified as the founder of Fundsz, and is identified as a “co-owner” of Fundsz.

9. Defendant Juan Pablo Valcarce resides in West Melbourne, Florida. 

Valcarce has never been registered with the CFTC in any capacity. Valcarce has 

served as the Chairman of the Fundsz Advisory Board throughout the Relevant 

Period. Valcarce also served as a primary spokesperson for Fundsz.

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 4 of 25 PageID 4
5

10. Defendant Brian Early resides in New Orleans, Louisiana. Early has 

never been registered with the CFTC in any capacity. Early has served as a 

member of the Fundsz Advisory Board throughout the Relevant Period. Early 

serves as a moderator on Fundsz’s Telegram group, which is its primary method of 

communicating with participants.

11. Defendant Alisha Ann Kingrey resides in Franklin, Arkansas. 

Kingrey has never been registered with the CFTC in any capacity. Kingrey has 

served as a member of the Fundsz Advisory Board throughout the Relevant Period. 

Kingrey also serves as a moderator on Fundsz’s Telegram group, which is its 

primary method of communicating with participants.

12. Defendant Fundsz is an unincorporated entity that began operation in 

or about October 2020. During the Relevant Period, Fundsz was operated by the 

Individual Defendants out of their various residences. Fundsz has never been 

registered with the CFTC in any capacity. 

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

13. In October 2020, Fundsz began operation using the website 

fundsz.com. On the website, Fundsz is described as a platform that “utilizes 

revolutionary blockchain technology that empowers individuals, charities and 

organizations to raise recurring, unrestricted and sustainable income.” 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 5 of 25 PageID 5
6

14. Fundsz used the tagline “Fundsz For Your Cause,” and implies that it 

promotes charitable donations. On its website, Fundsz states that “[t]ogether we 

can help millions of people across the globe improve their finances and their 

quality of life.” Fundsz’s website further describes the ways in which Fundsz 

supports “community unity,” including by supporting clean water, humanitarian 

aid, health aid, education, and disaster relief.

15. In reality, Fundsz is not a charitable organization, but rather is a getrich-quick scheme operated by each Defendant that preys on its participants by 

falsely suggesting that they will receive, on average, enormous returns of over 3% 

per week. According to marketing materials created and shared by each 

Defendant, Fundsz’s “weekly performance” consisted of steady profits of between 

approximately 2.90% and 3.55% each week. Defendants claim that they have been

able to attain such consistent profits by trading in digital asset commodities and

precious metals. 

16. The Defendants explained how these returns could cause participants’ 

initial contributions to Fundsz to balloon into huge gains. For instance, Defendant

Early told prospective participants that a $2,500 stake could be expected to grow to 

$1 million within 48 months without any additional deposits. 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 6 of 25 PageID 6
7

17. On or about July 26, 2022, Defendant Kingrey used an online interest 

calculator to show potential participants that $589 contributed to Fundsz would 

become over $300,000 in four years, and that a $10,000 contribution would 

increase in value to more than $5 million within four years. Defendant Valcarce, 

who also appeared in the webinar, then assured potential participants that “this is 

all 100% real,” and explained that historically Fundsz has achieved these returns. 

Valcarce recommended that participants “not withdraw[] anything” or “minimize 

withdrawals” in order to “maximize their earnings.” In a separate video, on or 

about October 31, 2022, Early represented that Fundsz participants would receive a 

passive return of 365% per year.

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 7 of 25 PageID 7

~ 

~ 

FUNDSZ 

FUNDSZ FOR YOUR CAUSE 

2.Sk 48mo to 1 M 

Sk 42mo to 1 M (48mo to 2M) 

1 Ok 36mo to 1 M (48mo to 4.6M) 

1 Sk 36mo to 1.SM {48mo to 7M) 

20k 36mo to 2M (31 mo to 1 M) 

25k 36mo to 2.SM {29mo to 1 M) 

30k 36mo to 3M {28mo to 1 M) 

35k 36mo to 3.SM (27mo to 1 M) 

40k 36mo to 4M {26mo to 1 M) 

45k 36mo to 4.SM ( 25mo to 1 M) 

S0k 36mo to SM {24mo to 1 M) 

*3% avg Weekly Compounding Staking 

Rewards 

**No Additional Deposits Made 

***NO WITHDRAWALS TAKEN*** 
8

18. In Fundsz marketing materials, Defendants made clear that 

participants needed only to send them their money in order to achieve these 

massive profits. Defendants advertised: “We do the work, you get paid a share of 

the Profits 3% weekly average 12% monthly average.” This was, according to 

Defendants’ marketing materials, “Passive Income with ZERO Effort on Your 

Part.” And participants were advised that they could “Make Money While You 

Sleep.” 

19. On or about November 21, 2022, Defendant Valcarce explained the 

Fundsz mechanics as follows:

Let’s get into how this works. What this is, so the passive component 

that we were mentioning earlier, we also call it staking, it’s nothing else 

but you bringing your crypto assets or digital currency, right, that you 

probably have in a wallet somewhere and depositing it into your Fundsz 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 8 of 25 PageID 8

WHAT IS STAKING? 
9

account, you let us take care of it, we do the work, zero effort on your 

part, you literally make money while you sleep, and we’re averaging 

three percent a week. Three percent a week, absolutely, you heard 

correctly. And we pay that every Friday.

20. Fundsz marketing materials stated that the returns came from 

“cryptocurrency” and “precious metals.” In one video from on or around July 30, 

2022, Defendant Early explained that participant funds are pooled and traded 

together. He went on to explain:

There is a variety of different methods that are employed in that trading. 

And so it’s a proprietary algorithm that is put together. And so its 

actually not just trading, its arbitrage, its forex, its long term, its short 

term, its a lot of different characteristics are put into this proprietary 

algorithm. And so a lot of people want to know the secret to the sauce. 

And folks, on this video I’m letting you know right now that that’s just 

not something we’re going to give up. The secret to our sauce. Its one 

of the reasons we have been able to be sustainable for six plus years.

21. The secret to the Fundsz “sauce” is fraud.

22. Similarly, Defendant Kingrey explained how Fundsz is able to payout 

3% weekly as follows, on June 24, 2023 in the Fundsz Telegram group—which is 

essentially an online message board that serves as the primary method for Fundsz 

to communicate with participants—by stating:

• Fundsz never uses more than 20% of the liquidity pool which 

allows consistency

• Fundsz does not rely solely on the cryptocurrency market due to its 

volatility

• Fundsz has developed a proprietary algorithm to participate in the 

crypto industry

• Fundsz also buys precious metals that generate income

• Fundsz has multiple healthy and sustainable sources of income

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 9 of 25 PageID 9
10

23. All of these statements regarding trading were false or misleading. 

The truth is found in Fundsz marketing materials that recently began to be posted 

in the Fundsz Telegram group, which state: “[w]e do not trade.” 

24. Defendants offered more details about the additional rewards that 

participants could receive (in addition to the already unbelievable 3% return on 

investment each week) by referring other new participants as part of Fundsz’s 

multi-level marketing scheme. For personal referrals, participants could obtain 10-

13% referral bonuses, and particularly successful recruiters were told they could

obtain “car bonuses” or even “house bonuses.” 

25. Defendants’ marketing efforts have been successful, and according to 

their website they have attracted more than 14,000 participants. 

26. And Defendants have personally benefitted. For example, between 

approximately September 14, 2021, and October 5, 2022, Defendant Larralde 

made 35 deposits of digital asset commodities valued at $216,398 from certain 

digital asset wallets associated with Fundsz into an account in Larralde’s name at 

Digital Asset Trading Platform A. And between approximately December 7, 2021,

and October 9, 2022, Larralde made 34 withdrawals of U.S. dollars from that same 

account at Digital Asset Exchange A, sending $210,388 in fiat currency to his 

personal account at a separate financial institution, Bank B.

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 10 of 25 PageID 10
11

Misrepresentations, Omissions and False Statements 

27. Throughout the Relevant Period, each Defendant solicited prospective 

participants to contribute to Fundsz through the fundsz.com website, and in 

frequent Zoom webinars, in-person meetings and events, and through solicitations

on YouTube and social media posted by a network of promoters. 

28. Each Defendant told participants and potential participants that they 

expected Fundsz to achieve returns of at least 3% per week on average. Each 

Defendant also represented to participants and potential participants that Fundsz 

had, throughout the Relevant Period, actually achieved returns of more than 3% 

per week on average. Defendants claimed that Fundsz’s returns were remarkably 

consistent on a week-to-week basis, generally between about 2.90% and 3.55% 

each and every week, regardless of whether prices in the market were rising or 

falling. 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 11 of 25 PageID 11
12

29. After participants joined Fundsz and contributed to accounts, the 

participants were able to log into their accounts to check the account balance. 

Each Friday, Fundsz announced the supposed returns for the week, and adjusted 

the participants’ supposed account balances accordingly. For instance, on June 30, 

2023, Fundsz announced that it had returned 3.07% over the preceding week, and 

it adjusted the account balances for all participants upward by 3.07%.

30. The participants’ increasing account balances gave the impression that 

Fundsz was profitably trading the participants’ contributions. This was false, and 

Defendants did not actually achieve trading returns in excess of 3% per week (or 

any other extraordinary return they claim, such as 365% per year). 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 12 of 25 PageID 12
13

31. The returns that Fundsz projected and reported were not based on 

actual profits from trading participant funds. Rather, each week the Defendants 

simply made up a fictional return for the preceding week to report to participants. 

32. After Defendants became aware of the Commission’s investigation, 

they told participants that the weekly returns for Fundsz would be lower going 

forward. On June 27, 2023, Defendant Early announced to participants that 

beginning on July 1, 2023, Fundsz weekly returns would be “up to 3%” rather than 

the previous returns of above 3% on average. And on July 7, Defendant Early 

reiterated that “[a]fter July 1st, our weekly percentage will max out up to 3%.” 

This advance announcement about future returns makes clear that Defendants have 

been simply making up the Fundsz weekly returns, not reporting the actual results 

of trading over the prior week. On July 7, 2023, Defendants announced that the 

returns for the previous week were exactly 3.00%. And later that same day, 

Fundsz marketing materials admitted that they “do not trade.”

33. Although Defendants had represented that they traded participant 

money using a “proprietary algorithm,” that statement was also false. 

34. Each Defendant made additional misrepresentations to participants 

and potential participants about Fundsz’s history. Marketing materials available on 

the fundsz.com website in 2023 state that Fundsz is “celebrating 7 years of on time 

and accurate payments.” 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 13 of 25 PageID 13
14

35. This statement is false for several reasons. First, Fundsz does not 

have “7 years” of history, as it came into existence in 2020. Second, the returns 

Fundsz announced each week were not “accurate,” or in any way related to actual 

trading or investment activities; they were fictional returns made up by the 

Defendants. And third, Fundsz did not make weekly “payments” from trading 

profits at all; Defendants simply changed the numbers that would appear on each 

participant’s account balance, but those numbers bore no relation to the actual 

assets held by Fundsz.

36. Defendants also falsely misrepresented historical returns Fundz

earned trading digital currency commodities such as bitcoin, ether, and tron in their 

marketing materials. For example, on or about October 31, 2022, Defendant

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 14 of 25 PageID 14

YEAR 

F ON TIME & ACCURATE 

PAYMENTS 

__ Tltmtk You To 0111t Ama~ C~ 
15

Valcarce presented a webinar in which he included a visual indicating that the 

price of bitcoin had increased by 700% over the prior 12 months, and that ether 

and tron had increased by 400% and 1,600%, respectively, over that same period. 

37. This was false. In reality, according to information publicly available 

from CoinMarketCap, over the period from November 1, 2021, through October 

31, 2022, the price of bitcoin had decreased by about 66%, ether had decreased by 

about 63%, and tron had decreased by about 37%. On September 26, 2022, 

Defendant Early used the same visual indicating massive increases in the values of 

bitcoin, ether, and tron even though each had actually fallen in value. 

38. Additionally, each Defendant made false statements about 

participants’ ability to withdraw their funds. Defendants told participants and 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 15 of 25 PageID 15
16

potential participants that they would be able to withdraw their funds—with 

interest—after 180 days. Instead, on or about June 23, 2023, after the Individual 

Defendants learned of the Commission’s investigation by virtue of having received 

subpoenas from the Commission, Defendants halted all participant withdrawals 

and refused to allow participants to withdraw their money. An announcement in 

the Fundsz Telegram group stated: “[E]ffective immediately all withdrawals have 

been placed on hold until we are able to address our compliance obligation.” The 

announcement further explained: “As you know we take every matter including 

paying you very seriously. Rest assured our intentions are always to move forward 

while we must remain in compliance with our legal and regulatory obligations.” 

39. After participants apparently complained that they were not able to 

withdraw money, on June 23, 2023, Defendant Kingrey responded, in the official 

Fundsz Telegram group: “First of all, watch how you talk to me. Fundsz is my 

Company and FUD [fear, uncertainty, and doubt] will not be tolerated.”

40. After she became aware of the Commission’s investigation, 

Defendant Kingrey also instructed Fundsz members to take down all social media 

posts or videos about Fundsz, saying “[i]f you find a Fundsz video and you know 

the person who owns it, contact them and tell them to unlist it.” Defendant Early 

echoed this sentiment, stating “ALL FACEBOOK POSTS WITH THE FUNDSZ 

LOGO HAVE TO BE DELETED IMMEDIATELY.”

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 16 of 25 PageID 16
17

41. Though most of Defendants’ marketing materials discussed their 

supposed trading in digital asset commodities and precious metals, as noted above,

Defendants also at times claimed to trade in foreign currency exchange (“forex”),

too. But this was false too; Defendants did not trade forex on behalf of Fundsz 

participants.

42. In sum, Defendants made at least the following false statements to 

participants and potential participants:

a. Trading would be done through a proprietary algorithm; 

b. Historically Fundsz had returned more than 3% per week;

c. Fundsz had been in operation over a period of at least seven years;

d. Participants’ account balances were actually growing; 

e. Participants would be able to withdraw their funds 180 days after 

deposit; and 

f. Cryptocurrency prices had increased by 400%-1600% during periods 

when, in reality, the prices had fallen.

43. Each Defendant made these misrepresentations and omissions 

willfully or with reckless disregard for their truth and by use of the mails or other 

means or instrumentalities of interstate commerce. 

44. Each Defendant made these misrepresentations and omissions in order 

to solicit participants and potential participants to contribute funds to Fundsz.

45. Based on Defendants’ misrepresentations and omissions, thousands of 

participants contributed millions of dollars to Fundsz.

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 17 of 25 PageID 17
18

46. In a webinar from on or around February 14, 2022, Defendant 

Kingrey stated that Defendant Larralde had been the founder of Fundz, and that 

“Rene [Larralde] is the one that is in control of our money.” Larralde also pays 

Valcarce, the Fundsz “Chairman of the Board,” a bi-weekly salary, through 

Maxous LLC, a separate company owned and operated by Larralde.

47. Upon information and belief, Defendants are not returning 

participants’ principal or purported profits from trading.

V. VIOLATIONS OF THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT

COUNT I – AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

Violations 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) (2022): Fraud by use of manipulative 

devices or contrivances.

48. The allegations set forth in the preceding paragraphs are re-alleged 

and incorporated herein by reference.

49. 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) makes it unlawful for any person, directly or 

indirectly, to use or employ, or attempt to use or employ, in connection with any 

swap or 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, including in contravention of 17 C.F.R. 

§ 180.1(a)(1)-(c).

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 18 of 25 PageID 18
19

50. 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a) provides, in relevant part, that it shall be 

unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, in connection with any 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; or (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.

51. A digital asset is anything that can be stored and transmitted 

electronically and has associated ownership or use rights. Digital assets include 

virtual currencies, such as bitcoin and ether, which are digital representations of 

value that function as mediums of exchange, unites of account, and/or stores of 

value. Certain digital assets are “commodities,” including those alleged herein, as 

defined under Section 1a(9) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 1a(9). There are commodity 

futures contracts on bitcoin and ether that trade on the Chicago Mercantile 

Exchange, a designated contract market regulated by the CFTC.

52. Precious metals are also “commodities” as defined under 7 U.S.C. 

§ 1a(9).

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 19 of 25 PageID 19
20

53. Defendants, directly or indirectly, in connection with contracts of sale 

of commodities in interstate commerce such as precious metals and digital asset 

commodities, including bitcoin and ether, intentionally or recklessly: used or 

employed, or attempted to use or employ, a scheme or artifice to defraud; including 

by making misrepresentations and omissions of material fact to participants and 

prospective participants, including, among other things, mispresenting the expected 

profits and risk of loss; reporting false trading profits to participants on a weekly 

basis, and failing to disclose that they did not actually trade participant funds.

54. As a result of the foregoing conduct, Defendants’ fraudulent conduct 

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

55. Defendant Larralde directly or indirectly controls Fundsz, and did not 

act in good faith or knowingly induced, directly or indirectly, Fundsz’s violations 

alleged in this Count, and is thus liable for Fundsz’s violations pursuant to Section 

13(b) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13c(b).

56. The foregoing acts, omissions and failures of Individual Defendants as 

alleged in this Count, and of all other agents of Fundsz, occurred and are occurring 

within the scope of their employment, office or agency with Fundsz; therefore, 

Fundsz is liable for these acts, omissions and failures pursuant to Section 

2(a)(1)(B) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(B), and Regulation 1.2, 17 C.F.R. § 1.2

(2022).

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 20 of 25 PageID 20
21

57. 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 

participants and potential participants during the Relevant Period 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: 

A. Find that all 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. Enter an order of permanent injunction restraining, enjoining, and 

prohibiting the Defendants, and their affiliates, agents, servants, 

employees, successors, assigns, attorneys, and all persons or entities in 

active concert with him, who receive actual notice of such order by 

personal service or otherwise, from engaging in the conduct described 

above, in violation of 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) and 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)-(3);

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 21 of 25 PageID 21
22

C. Enter an order of permanent injunction enjoining Defendants, and their

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

all persons or entities in active concert with them, who receive actual 

notice of such order by personal service or otherwise, from directly or 

indirectly: 

a. 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)); 

b. Entering into any transactions involving “commodity interests” (as 

that term is defined in Regulation 1.3, 17 C.F.R. § 1.3 (2022)), 

precious metals, or “digital asset commodities,” (as that term is 

described herein), including bitcoin and ether, for accounts held in the 

name of Defendants or for accounts in which any Defendant has a 

direct or indirect interest; 

c. Having any commodity interests, precious metal, or digital asset

commodities traded on Defendants’ behalf; 

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, precious metals, or digital 

asset commodities; 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 22 of 25 PageID 22
23

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

purpose of purchasing or selling any commodity interests, precious 

metals, or digital asset commodities; 

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) 

(2022); and 

g. Acting as a principal (as that term is defined in Regulation 3.1(a), 

17 C.F.R. § 3.1(a) (2022)), agent, or any other officer or employee of 

any person 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). 

D. 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, 

directly or indirectly, from acts or practices which constitute violations of 

the Act and Regulations as described herein, including pre-judgment and 

post-judgment interest; 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 23 of 25 PageID 23
24

E. Enter an order requiring 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; 

F. Enter an order directing Defendants, as well as any successors thereof, to 

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

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

or among Defendants and any of the participants whose funds were 

received by Defendants as a result of the acts and practices that 

constituted violations of the Act and Regulations, as described herein; 

G. 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; 

H. Enter an order requiring Defendants to pay costs and fees as permitted by 

28 U.S.C. §§ 1920 and 2413(a)(2); and 

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 24 of 25 PageID 24
25

I. Enter an order providing such other and further relief as this Court may 

deem necessary and appropriate under the circumstances. 

Dated: July 31, 2023 Respectfully submitted,

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION

/s/ Douglas Snodgrass

Douglas Snodgrass

Elizabeth Streit

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission

Division of Enforcement

77 W Jackson Blvd, Suite 800

Chicago, Illinois 60604

(312) 596-0537 (Streit)

(312) 596-0663 (Snodgrass)

dsnodgrass@cftc.gov

estreit@cftc.gov

Case 6:23-cv-01445-WWB-DCI Document 1 Filed 07/31/23 Page 25 of 25 PageID 25