Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 1 of 18

JUDGI: OAVlO GUADERRAMA 

COMMODITY FUTURES 

TRADING COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ABNER ALEJANDRO TINOCO, and 

KJKIT & MESS INVESTMENTS, LLC, 

Defendants. 

Case No: 

Hon. ---------

EP21CV0237 

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL MONETARY 

PENALTIES, AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF 

The Commodity Futures Tn1ding Commission ("CFTC" or "Commission"), an 

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

I. INTRODUCTION 

1. Betwt":en at least September, 2020 and continuing through the present ("Relevant 

Period''), Defendants Abner Alejandro Tinoco ("Tinoco"), and his Texas company, Kikit & 

Mess Investments. LLC ("Kikit") (collectively, ''Defendants"), have engaged in an ongoing 

scheme in which they have already defrauded over 61 clients, many or whom reside in Texas and 

the Southwest region of the United States and Mexico, out of at least $3.9 million. Specifically, 

Defendants have fraudulently solicited and accepted money from clients ror the purpose of 

managing their funds in '"customized client portfolios" to trade in foreign exchange markets and 

cryptocurrencies. In reality, however, Defendants did not trade their clients' funds in managed 

accounts: instead. they misappropriated the funds for Tinoco's personal benefit or to pay bogus 

"profits" that they had folsely reported to clients. in a manner akin to a Ponzi scheme. 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 2 of 18

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

Defendants have violated certain anti-fraud provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act ("Act" 

or "CEA"), 7 U.S.C. §§ 1-26 (2018) namely, Sections 4b(a)( I )(A) and (C), 4b(a)(2)(A) and (C), 

4o(l), and 6(c)(l) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 6b(a)(l)(A), (C), 6b(a)(2)(A), (C), 60(1), 9(1) (2018), 

and Commission Regulations ("Regulations") 5.2(b) and 180.1 (a)( I )-(3), 17 C.F.R. §§ 5.2(b ), 

180.1 (a)( I )-(3) (2020). 

3. Unless restrained and enjoined by this Court, Defendants are likely to continue 

engaging in the acts and practices alleged in this Complaint. 

4. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 6c of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1 (2018), the 

CFTC brings this action 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 clients, disgorgement, pre- and post-judgment interest, 

and such other equitable relief as this Court may deem necessary and appropriate. 

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

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

(2018) ( codifying federal question jurisdiction) and 28 U.S.C. § 1345 (2018) (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-l(a) (2018), 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 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. 

2 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 3 of 18

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

7 U .S.C. § l 3a- l ( e) (20 I 8), because the Defendants transacted business 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. 

Ill. PARTIES 

7. Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission is an independent federal 

regulatory agency charged by Congress with administering and enforcing the Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 1-

26 (2018), and Regulations, 17 C.F.R. pts. 1-190 (2020). 

8. Defendant Abner Alejandro Tinoco is a resident of El Paso, Texas, and has 

never been registered with the CFTC in any capacity. 

9. Defendant Kikit & Mess Investments, LLC is a Texas limited liability 

corporation, fonned in September 2020 with its office in El Paso, Texas. Tinoco is the 

Managing Member of Kikit, which has never been registered with the CFTC in any capacity. 

IV. STATUTORY BACKGROUND 

A. Definitions 

10. Section la(l2) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § la( 12) (2018), defines a CTA, in relevant 

part, as any person who for compensation or profit, engages in the business of advising others, 

either directly or through publications, writings, or electronic media, as the value of or 

advisability of trading in: (I) any contract of sale of a commodity for future delivery, security 

futures product, or swap; or (11) any agreement, contract, or transactions in foreign currency as 

described in Section 2(c)(2)(C)(i) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. * 2(c)(2)(C)(i) (2018). In addition, a CTA 

for purposes of forex transactions, is defined by Regulation 5.1 ( e)(l ), I 7 C.F.R. § 5.1 ( e)( I) 

(2020), as "any person who exercises discretionary trading authority or obtains written 

authorization to exercise discretionary trading authority over any account for or on behalf of any 

3 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 4 of 18

person that is not an eligible contract participant [("ECP")] as defined in Section I a( 18) of the 

Act, in connection with retail forex transactions." 

11. An ECP is defined by Section I a(l 8)(A)(v)(l) and (xi) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 

§ 1 a( l 8)(A)(v)(l), (xi) (2018), in relevant part, as: a corporation, partnership, proprietorship, 

organization, trust, or other entity that has total assets exceeding$ IO million; or an individual 

who has invested on a discretionary basis, the aggregate of which is in excess of (a) $IO million, 

or (b) $5 million and who enters the transaction "to manage the risk associated with an asset 

owned or liability incurred, or reasonably likely to be owned or incurred, by the individual." 

12. Regulation 5.1 (m), 17 C.F.R. § 5.1 (m) (2020), defines a "retail forex transaction" 

as any off-exchange agreement, contract or transaction in foreign currency offered to, or entered 

into with, non-ECPs, as described in Section 2(c)(2)(C) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C) (2018). 

In common parlance, forex or foreign exchange markets typically refers to Section 2(c)(2)(C) 

transactions that are leveraged, margined, or financed. 

13. Section 2(c)(2)(C) of the Act delineates the Commission's jurisdiction over 

agreements, contracts and transactions in forex. In relevant part, 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C)(vii) 

provides that the Commission shall have jurisdiction over an account that is offered for the 

purpose of trading, or that trades, any agreement, contract, or transaction in foreign currency 

described in clause 2(c)(2)(C)(i). In addition, 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C)(i)(l), in relevant part, applies 

to any agreement, contract or transaction in foreign currency that is offered to, or entered into 

with, a person that is not an ECP, unless the counterparty, or the person offering to be the 

counterparty, of the person that is not an ECP fal]s under one of the enumerated exceptions not 

applicable here. 

4 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 5 of 18

14. Digital assets such as Bitcoin are encompassed in the definition of "commodity" 

under Section la(9) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § la(9) (2018). In common parlance, cryptocurrency 

typically refers to digital assets. 

B. Derivative Liability Under the Act 

15. Section 13(b) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13c(b) (2018), provides that any person who, 

directly or indirectly, controls any person who has violated the Act, or regulations promulgated 

thereunder, may be held liable for such violations to the same extent as the controlled person if 

the controlling person did not act in good faith or knowingly induced, directly or indirectly, the 

acts constituting the violation. 

16. Section 2(a)(l)(B) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(l)(B) (2018), and Regulation 1.2, 

17 C.F .R. § 1.2 (2020), provide that the act, omission, or failure of any official, agent, or other 

person acting for any ... corporation ... within the scope of his employment or office, shall be 

deemed the act, omission, or failure of such ... corporation ... , as welJ as such official, agent, 

or other person." 

V. FACTS 

17. In September 2020, Tinoco, fonned Kikit, a Texas LLC, as an investment firm 

and designated himself as its Managing Member. 

18. In October 2020, Tinoco launched a website at www.kikitnmessinv.com. The 

website describes Kikit ("About Us") as an investment fim,: 

Kikit & Mess Investments is a El Paso based investment firm that oflers 

customized client portfolios in the cryptocurrency and foreign exchange markets. 

Operating in downtown El Paso, our experienced traders, account executives and 

customer service representatives serve clients throughout the Borderland, 

Southwest and into Mexico to give our clients access to top portfolios available in 

cryptocurrency. With a wealth of knowledge in the industry, we strive to educate 

our clients about the opportunities they have with us and provide them the 

security, trust and proven growth to build lasting relationships. 

5 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 6 of 18

19. The Ki kit website FAQ section functionally describes Ki kit (''What do you do?") 

as commodity trading advisor (''CT A") that manages individual client accounts: 

We specialize in managing investment accounts based in the cryptocurrency and 

foreign exchange market. We offer customized investment plans tailored to our 

client's investment needs so that they can experience financial freedom while not 

having to waste their time trading. 

20. The Kikit website further explains that Kikit offers ("We Offer") individualized 

trading advice: 

Tailored portfolio strategies based on your individual risk tolerance. Our 

investment professionals can align your investment strategy for proper 

diversification to grow and protect your wealth. 

21. In addition, as part of its client solicitations, the Ki kit website offers the 

testimonial of a purportedly satisfied client: 

"I studied Finance at UTEP but never did any trading or investments in the stock 

market. After watching how Kikit & Mess Investments operates in Forex, I 

immediately contacted them to learn more. I started with a 90 day investment and 

saw a profit in 2 weeks so I decided to extend my investment. I couldn't be 

happier with investing with Kikit and Mess." - Ruben 

22. By referring to foreign exchange markets and forex and by marketing to retail 

(non-ECP) clients, Defendants invoked a commonly understood term that encompasses 

leveraged, margined, or financed retail forex transactions. Similarly, by referring to 

cryptocurrency, Defendants invoked a commonly understood term for digital assets, the most 

widely recognized of which is Bitcoin, which is traded on a regulated designated contract market 

("DCM"). 

23. Also, in October 2020, Tinoco opened a business bank account for Kikit and 

immediately began to receive deposits into that account from individual clients, with their 

trading funds coming via checks, wires and Zelle transfers. Tinoco was the sole signatory on the 

Kikit bank account. 

6 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 7 of 18

24. During the Relevant Period, Tinoco deposited more than $3.9 million into Kikit's 

bank account, most if not all of those funds coming from at least 61 individual clients. On 

information and belief, neither Ki kit nor Tinoco nor any of the individual clients were ECPs. 

25. Defendants did not use clients' funds to trade forex or cryptocurrency, or any 

other trading in managed accounts as promised on its website. Defendants used the vast majority 

of funds from clients to pay for Tinoco's personal expenses such as travel costs for the chartering 

of a private jet, luxury mansion, and car rentals, and, in recent months, the purchase or lease of a 

luxury automobile and real estate in the El Paso area. 

26. Defendants also used some of the deposited client funds to pay bogus "investment 

profits" to other clients in a manner akin to a Ponzi scheme 

27. Defendants advised clients that they could access their portfolios via Kikit's 

online platform, where they could see their accounts. 

28. Kikit did not have a commodity trading account at any registered futures 

commission merchant C'FCM") or forex trading account at any retail foreign exchange dealer 

("RFED"). Further, although Tinoco opened a trading account in his own name at an FCM prior 

to the Relevant Period, depositing a mere $10 and executing negligible trades of foreign currency 

pairs on leverage, he conducted no trading during the Relevant Period in that account. During 

the Relevant Period, Kikit had on their payroll an employee ("Employee I") who was never 

registered in any capacity with the CFTC. Employee I promoted himself as a "broker" for Kikit 

on his Linkedln page, while Kikit's Facebook page described him as Kikit's ''co-founder." Kikit 

funded a trading account at an FCM for Employee I during the Relevant Period which was 

minimally funded and did very little trading. 

7 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 8 of 18

29. During the Relevant Period, the Defendants misappropriated at least $3.9 miHion 

in client funds. Kikit's bank account had a balance exceeding $2 million in July 2021; however, 

after the bank notified the Defendants in mid-August that they would be closing the account, the 

Defendants withdrew $644,489.46 on September 1, 202 l, and exhausted the remaining balance 

thereafter resulting in a negative balance on September 7, 2020 I. 

VI. VIOLATIONS OF THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT 

COUNTI 

Violations of Section 4b(a)(l)(A) and (C) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(l)(A), (C) (2018): 

Fraud in Connection with Commodities Transactions by Misappropriation, 

Misrepresentations and Material Omissions 

30. Paragraphs I through 29 are re-alleged and incorporated herein by reference. 

3 l. The Act at 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(l)(A), (C), in relevant part, makes it unlawful for any 

person, in or in connection with any order to make, or the making of, any contract of sale of any 

commodity in interstate commerce or for future delivery that is made, or to be made, on or 

subject to the rules of a designated contract market, for or on behalf of any other person: (A) to 

cheat or defraud or attempt to cheat or defraud such other person; or (C) willfully to deceive or 

attempt to deceive such other person by any means whatsoever in regard to any order or contract 

or the disposition or execution of any order or contract, or in regard to any act of agency 

perfonned, with respect to any order or contract for such other person. 

32. Defendants violated 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)( I )(A), (C) during the Relevant Period by, 

among other things: (I) falsely telling clients that their funds were being used to trade in 

managed cryptocurrency accounts (commodities in interstate commerce); and 

(2) misappropriating client funds for Tinoco's personal benefit, including paying travel costs for 

the chartering of a private jet, luxury mansion and car rentals, and, in recent months, for the 

8 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 9 of 18
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 10 of 18

attempt to cheat or defraud the other person; or (C) willfully to deceive or attempt to deceive the 

other person by any means whatsoever in regard to any order or contract or the disposition or 

execution of any order or contract, or in regard to any act of agency performed, with respect to 

an order or contract for or, in the case of paragraph (2), with the other person." 

39. Section 2(c)(2)(C) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C) 2018), among other things, 

contains three grants which make clear that the CFTC has jurisdiction over, and that certain 

antifraud provisions in the Act apply to, retail forex: 

a. Pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C)(ii)(I), forex agreements, contracts, or 

transactions described in 7 U.S.C. § 2( c)(2)(C)(i) "shall be subject to" the 

anti fraud provisions of 7 U.S.C. §§ 6b and 60, among other Sections of the 

Act; 

b. Pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C)(iv), 7 U.S.C. § 6b "shall apply to" the forex 

agreements, contracts, or transactions described in 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C)(i) "as 

if' they were a contract of sale of a commodity for future delivery; and 

c. Pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C)(vii), "[t]his Act applies to, and the 

Commission shall have jurisdiction over an account ... that is offered for the 

purpose of trading, or that trades," forex agreements, contracts, or transactions 

described in 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C)(i). 

40. The foreign currency transactions offered by Defendants are retail forex 

transactions pursuant to Regulation 5.1 (m), 17 C.F.R. § 5.1 (m) (2020). Regulation 5.2(b )(I) and 

(3), 17 C.F.R. § 5.2(b)( I), (3) (2020), makes it unlawful "for any person, by use of the mails or 

by any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, directly or indirectly, in or in 

connection with any retail forex transaction: ( 1) [t]o cheat or defraud or attempt to cheat or 

10 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 11 of 18

defraud any person; or (3) [w]illfully to deceive or attempt to deceive any person by any means 

whatsoever." 

41. Defendants violated 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(A), (C) and 17 C.F.R. § 5.2(b) ( 1 ), (3), 

by, among other things: (I) falsely telling clients that their funds were being used to trade in 

managed forex accounts; and (2) misappropriating client funds for Tinoco's personal benefit, 

including paying travel costs for the chartering of a private jet, luxury mansion and car rentals, 

and, in recent months, for the purchase or lease of a luxury automobile and real estate in the 

El Paso area, and also using client funds to pay false profits to other clients, in the manner of a 

Ponzi scheme. 

42. Defendants engaged in such acts by the use of the mails or other means or 

instrumentality of interstate commerce. 

43. The Defendants committed the acts and practices described herein willfully, 

knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the truth. 

44. Defendant Tinoco is a controlling person of Kikit and has failed to act in good 

faith, or has knowingly induced, directly or indirectly, the acts of Kikit constituting the violations 

set forth in Count II. Accordingly, Tinoco is liable for each and every violation of the Act 

committed by Ki kit, pursuant to 7 U .S.C. § l 3c(b ). 

45. Ki kit is liable for the acts, omissions, or failures of Tinoco, and any other agents, 

employees, or persons otherwise acting for them set forth in Count II, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 

§ 2(a)( I )(B) and 17 C.F.R. § 1.2. 

46. Each act of misappropriation, misrepresentation or omission of material facts, 

made during the Relevant Period, including, but not limited to, those specifically alleged herein, 

I I 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 12 of 18

constitutes a separate and distinct violation of 7 U.S.C. § 6b(a)(2)(A), (C) and 17 C.F.R. 

§ 5.2(b)(l), (3). 

COUNT III 

Violations of Section 4o(l)(A) and (B) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6o(l)(A), (B) (2018): 

Fraud by a Commodity Trading Advisor 

47. Paragraphs I through 46 are re-alleged and incorporated herein by reference. 

48. Defendant Kikit, through the offer of its managed trading account services, for 

compensation or profit, have engaged in the business of advising others, either directly or 

through publications , writings, or electronic media, as to the value of or the advisability of 

trading in "any agreement, contract, or transaction described in section 2(c)(2)(C)(i)" (foreign 

currency). As such, Defendant Kikit acted as a CTA within the meaning of Section la(l2) of the 

Act, 7 U.S.C. § la(l2) (20 I 8). Therefore, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(C)(ii) and (vii), 

Defendant Kikit's retail forex agreements, contracts and transactions and accounts shall be 

subject to 7 U .S.C. § 60. 

49. During the Relevant Period, Defendant Kikit violated 7 U.S.C. § 60, in that, while 

acting as a CTA, through use of the mails or other means or instrumentality of interstate 

commerce such as the internet, electronic mail and electronic trading, Defendant Kikit employed 

a device, scheme or artifice to defraud clients and prospective clients and engage in a transaction, 

practice or course of business which operates as a fraud upon its client and prospective clients 

by, among other things: (I) falsely telling clients that their funds were being used to trade in 

managed forex and cryptocurrency accounts; and (2) misappropriating client funds for Tinoco's 

personal benefit, including paying travel costs for the chartering of a private jet, luxury mansion 

and car rentals, and, in recent months, for the purchase or lease of a luxury automobile and real 

12 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 13 of 18

estate in the El Paso area, and also using client funds to pay false profits to other clients, in the 

manner of a Ponzi scheme. 

50. Defendant Tinoco is a controlling person of Kikit and has failed to act in good 

faith, or has knowingly induced, directly or indirectly, the acts of Kikit constituting the violations 

set forth in Count Ill. Accordingly, Tinoco is liable for each and every violation of the Act 

committed by Kikit, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 13(b). 

51. Kikit is liable for the acts, omissions, or failures of Tinoco, and any other agents, 

employees, or persons otherwise acting for them set forth in Count III, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 

§ 2(a)( 1 )(8) and 17 C.F.R. § 1.2. 

52. Each act of misappropriation, misrepresentation or omission of material facts, 

made during the Relevant Period, including, but not limited to, those specifically alleged herein, 

constitutes a separate and distinct violation of7 U.S.C. § 6o(l)(A), (B). 

COUNTIV 

Violations of Section 6(c)(l) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) (2018), and 

Regulation 180.l(a)(l)-(3), 17 C.F.R. § 180.l(a)(l)-(3) (2020): 

Fraud 

53. Paragraphs I through 52 are realleged and incorporated herein by reference. 

54. The Act in 7 U.S.C. § 9( I) 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)(l )-(c). 

55. The Regulations at 17 C.F.R. § 180.1 (a) provide, 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 

13 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 14 of 18

any registered entity, to intentionally or recklessly: (I) 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. 

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

commodities in interstate commerce, contracts for future delivery on or subject to the rules of a 

registered entity, intentionally or recklessly: 

(a) used or employed, or attempted to use or employ, a scheme or artifice to defraud; 

including falsely telling clients that their funds were being used to trade in managed forex 

and cryptocurrency accounts and misappropriating client funds for personal use; (b) 

made, or attempted to make, untrue or misleading statements of material fact, or omitted 

to state material facts necessary to make the statements made not untrue or misleading; 

including falsely telling clients that funds were being used to trade in managed forex and 

cryptocurrency accounts and misappropriating client funds for personal use; and/or 

( c) engaged in, or attempted to engage in, acts, practices, or a course of business that 

operated or would operate as a fraud or deceit on Kikit's clients, including falsely telling 

clients that funds were being used to trade in managed forex and cryptocurrency accounts 

and misappropriating client funds for personal use. 

57. As a result of the foregoing conduct, Defendants' fraudulent conduct violated 

7 U.S.C. § 9( I) and 17 C.F.R. § I 80.1 (a)( I )-(3). 

14 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 15 of 18

58. Defendant Tinoco is a controlling person of Kikit and has failed to act in good 

faith, or has knowingly induced, directly or indirectly, the acts of Kikit constituting the violations 

set forth in Count IV. Accordingly, Tinoco is liable for each and every violation of the Act 

committed by Kikit, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 13(b). 

59. Kikit is liable for the acts, omissions, or failures of Tinoco, and any other agents, 

employees, or persons otherwise acting for them set forth in Count IV, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 

§ 2(a)( l )(B) and 17 C.F.R. § 1.2. 

60. 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 Kikit's clients during the Relevant Period is alleged as a separate 

and distinct violation of7 U.S.C. § 9(1) and 17 C.F.R. § 180.l(a)(l)-(3). 

VII. RELIEF REQUESTED 

WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court, as authorized by 

Section 6c of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a- I (20 I 8), and pursuant to its own equitable powers: 

A. Find that the Defendants violated Sections 4b(a)( I )(A) and (C), 4b(a)(2)(A) and 

(C), 4o(l )(A) and (B), and 6(c)(I) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 6b(a)( I )(A), (C), 6b(a)(2)(A), (C), 

6o(l)(A), (B), 9(1) (2018), and Regulations 5.2(b)(I), (3), and 180.l(a)(l)-(3), 17 C.F.R. 

§§ 5.2(b)(l), (3), 180.l(a)(l)-(3) (2020); 

B. Enter an order of pemianent injunction enjoining Tinoco and Kikit, 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 engaging in the conduct described above, in violation of 

15 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 16 of 18

7 U.S.C. §§ 6b(a)( J )(A), (C), 6b(a)(2)(A), (C), 60( J )(A), (B), 9( J ), and 17 C.F.R. §§ 5.2(b )(I), 

(3), 180. l(a)( J )-(3); 

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: 

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

defined by Section la( 40) of the Act, 7 U .S.C. § la( 40) (2018) ); 

2. Entering into any transactions involving "commodity interests" (as that 

term is defined in Regulation 1.3, 17 C.F.R. § 1.3 (2020)) for accounts 

held in the name of Tinoco or Kikit or for accounts in which Tinoco or 

Kikit has a direct or indirect interest; 

3. Having any commodity interests traded on Defendants' behalf; 

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; 

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

purpose of purchasing or seJling any commodity interests; 

6. 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. l 4(a)(9), 17 C.F .R. § 4. I 4(a)(9) (2020); and 

16 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 17 of 18

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

17 C.F.R. § 3.1 (a) (2020)), 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. l 4(a)(9). 

D. Enter an order directing Tinoco and Kikit, 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 as described herein, including pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; 

E. Enter an order requiring Tinoco and Kikit, 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 Tinoco and Kikit, 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 Tinoco and Kikit and any of 

the customers whose funds were received by Tinoco and Ki kit as a result of the acts and 

practices that constituted violations of the Act, as described herein; 

G. Enter an order directing Tinoco and Kikit to pay a civil monetary penalty assessed 

by the Court, in an amount not to exceed the penalty prescribed by Section 6c( d)( I) of the Act, 

7 U.S.C. § l3a- I ( d)( I) (20 I 8), as adjusted for inflation pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties 

Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, Pub. L. 114-74, tit. Vil, § 70 I, 129 Stat. 

584, 599-600, see Regulation 143.8, 17 C.F.R. § 143.8 (2020), for each violation of the Act, as 

described herein; 

17 
Case 3:21-cv-00237-DCG Document 3 Filed 09/28/21 Page 18 of 18

H. Enter an order requiring Tinoco and Kikit to pay costs and fees as pennitted by 

28 U .S.C. §§ 1920 and 2413(a)(2) (2018); and 

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

necessary and appropriate under the circumstances. 

Dated: September 28, 2021 Respectfully submitted, 

Plaintiff, COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 

ls/Susan B. Padove 

Susan Padove 

Senior Trial Attorney 

spadove@cftc.gov (Padove) 

David Terrell 

Chief Trial Attorney 

dterrell@cftc.gov (Terrell) 

Scott Williamson 

Deputy Regional Counsel 

swilliamson@cftc.gov (Williamson) 

Division of Enforcement 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

525 W. Monroe St., Suite 1 100 

Chicago, IL 60661 

(312) 596-0700 

Phone: (202) 390-6885 (Padove - cell) 

Fax: (312)596-0714 

18