1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

NISHAD SINGH, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 23-CV-1684

[PROPOSED] CONSENT ORDER OF 

JUDGMENT AS TO LIABILITY AND 

PARTIAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 

AGAINST NISHAD SINGH 

INTRODUCTION 

On February 28, 2023, Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the 

“Commission” or “CFTC”) filed a Complaint against Nishad Singh (“Singh” or “Defendant”) 

seeking injunctive and other equitable relief, as well as the imposition of civil penalties, for 

violations of the Commodity Exchange Act (“Act”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 1–26 and the Commission’s 

Regulations (“Regulations”) promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. pts. 1–190 (2021). 

CONSENTS AND AGREEMENTS 

To effect partial resolution of the matters alleged in the Complaint against Defendant as to 

his liability on the charges in the Complaint without a trial on the merits or any further judicial 

proceedings, Defendant: 

1. Consents to the entry of this Consent Order of Judgment on Liability and Partial

Injunctive Relief Against Nishad Singh (“Consent Order”); 

2. Affirms that he has read and agreed to this Consent Order voluntarily, and that no

promise, other than as specifically contained herein, or threat, has been made by the CFTC or any 

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 1 of 11

I. 

II. 
2 

member, officer, agent or representative thereof, or by any other person, to induce his consent to 

this Consent Order; 

3. Waives service of the summons and Complaint; 

4. Admits the jurisdiction of this Court over him and the subject matter of this action 

pursuant to Section 6c of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1; 

5. Admits the jurisdiction of the CFTC over the conduct and transactions at issue in 

this action pursuant to the Act; 

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

7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(e); 

7. Waives: 

(a) Any and all claims that he may possess under the Equal Access to Justice 

Act, 5 U.S.C. § 504 and 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and/or the rules promulgated by 

the Commission in conformity therewith, Part 148 of the Regulations, 17 

C.F.R. pt. 148 (2021), relating to, or arising from, this action; 

(b) Any and all claims that he may possess under the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-121, tit. II, 

§§ 201–253, 110 Stat. 847, 857–74 (codified as amended at 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2412 and in scattered sections of 5 U.S.C. and 15 U.S.C.), relating to, or 

arising from, this action; 

(c) Any claim of Double Jeopardy based upon the institution of this action or 

the entry in this action of any order imposing a civil monetary penalty or 

any other relief, including this Consent Order; and 

(a) Any and all rights of appeal from this Consent Order; 

8. Consents to the continued jurisdiction of this Court over him for the purpose of 

implementing and carrying out the terms and conditions of all orders and decrees, including orders 

setting the appropriate amounts of restitution, disgorgement and civil monetary penalty, as well as 

any further injunctive remedies that may be entered herein, to entertain any suitable application or 

motion for additional relief within the jurisdiction of the Court, to assure compliance with this 

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 2 of 11
3 

Consent Order and for any other purpose relevant to this action, even if Defendant now or in the 

future resides outside the jurisdiction of this Court; 

9. Agrees that he will not oppose enforcement of this Consent Order on the grounds, 

if any exist, that it fails to comply with Rule 65(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 

hereby waives any objection based thereon; 

10. Agrees that neither he nor any of his agents or employees under his authority or 

control shall: (i) take any action or make any public statement denying, directly or indirectly, any 

allegation in the Complaint and/or this Consent Order; (ii) take any action or make any public 

statement creating or tending to create the impression that the Complaint and/or this Consent Order 

is without a factual basis; or (iii) permit any public statement to the effect that Defendant does not 

admit the allegations of the Complaint, or that this Consent Order contains no admissions of the 

allegations; provided, however, that nothing in this provision shall affect his: (a) testimonial 

obligations, or (b) right to take legal positions in other proceedings to which the CFTC is not a 

party. Defendant further stipulates for purposes of exceptions to discharge set forth in Section 523 

of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. § 523, that the allegations in the Complaint are true, and further, 

that any debt for restitution, disgorgement, prejudgment interests, civil monetary penalty or other 

amount ultimately ordered due by Defendant under any judgment, order, consent order, decree or 

settlement agreement entered in connection with this proceeding is a debt for violation by 

Defendant of federal commodities laws. Defendant shall comply with this agreement, and shall 

undertake all steps necessary to ensure that all of his agents or employees under his authority or 

control understand and comply with this agreement; 

11. Agrees that in connection with any Commission motion for restitution, 

disgorgement and/or civil monetary penalties, and at any hearing held on such a motion: 

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 3 of 11
4 

(a) Defendant will be precluded from arguing that he did not violate the federal laws as alleged in 

the Complaint; (b) Defendant may not challenge the validity of his consents and agreements herein 

or this Consent Order; (c) solely for the purposes of such motion, the allegations of the Complaint 

and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in this Consent Order shall be accepted as and 

deemed true by the Court; and (d) the Court may determine the issues raised in the motion on the 

basis of affidavits, declarations, excerpts of sworn deposition or investigative testimony, witness 

testimony, and documentary evidence, without regard to the standards for summary judgment 

contained in Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

12. Agree for purposes of the waiver of any and all rights under the Equal Access to 

Justice Act and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, specified in 

Paragraph 7, that the Commission is the prevailing party in this action. 

13. Agrees that no provision of this Consent Order shall in any way limit or impair the 

ability of any other person or entity to seek any legal or equitable remedy against Defendant in any 

other proceeding; and 

14. Agrees that the issues of relief, remedies, and penalties pursuant to Section 6c of 

the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1, are still unresolved and are reserved for further determination by this 

Court separately, and upon motion of the Commission or by a proposed consent order. 

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 4 of 11
5 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 

 The Court, being fully advised in the premises, finds that there is good cause for the entry 

of this Consent Order and that there is no just reason for delay. The findings and conclusions in 

this Consent Order are not binding on any other party to this action. The Court finds:

15. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Section 6c of the Act, 

7 U.S.C. § 13a-1.

16. Venue properly lies with this Court pursuant to Section 6c(e) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 

§ 13a-1(e), because acts and practices in violation of the Act occurred within this District. 

17. In United States v. Singh, Crim. No. 22-cr-673 (S.D.N.Y. 2023), Defendant entered 

into a written agreement to plead guilty to criminal offenses including Conspiracy to Commit 

Commodities Fraud in violation of 7 U.S.C. §§ 9(1) and 13(a)(5); 18 U.S.C. § 371; and 17 C.F.R. 

§ 180.1, and in connection with that plea, made certain admissions. 

18. On December 21, 2022, the Commission filed an Amended Complaint charging 

Samuel Bankman-Fried (“Bankman-Fried”), FTX Trading Ltd. d/b/a FTX.com (“FTX”), Alameda 

Research, LLC (“Alameda”), and others with misappropriation of FTX customer funds and a 

scheme to defraud 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) (2021), among other charges. CFTC v. BankmanFried et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-10503-PKC (S.D.N.Y.) (the “Bankman-Fried Complaint”). 

19. Defendant Singh 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) (2021) by intentionally or recklessly, in connection 

with any swap, or contract of sale or any commodity in interstate commerce, or contract for future 

delivery on or subject to the rules of any registered entity, directly or indirectly: using or 

employing, or attempting to use or employ, a scheme or artifice to defraud; and/or engaging in, or 

attempting to engage in, acts, practices, or a course of business that operated or would operate as 

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 5 of 11

TIT. 
6 

a fraud or deceit on any person, including, but not limited to, FTX customers and/or other market 

participants. Defendant Singh did so by taking “loans” from Alameda that he knew or should have 

known consisted, at least in part, of misappropriated FTX customer assets. Defendant Singh is 

therefore liable on Count I of the CFTC’s Complaint. 

20. Defendant Singh willfully aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, 

procured and/or committed acts in combination or concert with FTX, Alameda, and/or BankmanFried that constituted 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). Therefore, as a result of the conduct alleged in the 

Complaint, pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. §13c(a), Singh is liable for FTX, 

Alameda, and Bankman-Fried’s 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). Defendant Singh is therefore liable on 

Count II of the CFTC’s Complaint. 

PERMANENT INJUNCTION 

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

of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1, Defendant Singh is permanently restrained, enjoined and prohibited 

from, directly or indirectly in connection with any swap, contract of sale of any commodity in 

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

entity, using or employing, or attempting to use or employ, a scheme or artifice to defraud; and/or 

engaging in, or attempting to engage in, acts, practices, or a course of business that operates or 

would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, 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); and from willfully 

aiding, abetting, counseling, commanding, inducing or procuring such violations as a principal in 

violation of Section 13(a) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13c(a).

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 6 of 11

TV. 
7 

22. Defendant is also permanently restrained, enjoyed and prohibited from directly or 

indirectly:

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

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

b. entering into any transactions involving “commodity interests” (as that term is 

defined in Commission Regulation 1.3, 17 C.F.R. § 1.3 (2022)), for Defendant’s 

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

c. having any commodity interests, as that term is described herein, 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, as that term is described herein, and/or digital asset commodities; 

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

purpose of purchasing or selling any commodity interests, as that term is described 

herein, and/or digital asset commodities; 

f. applying for registration or claiming exemption from registration with the 

Commission in any capacity, and 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) (2022); 

g. acting as a principal (as that term is defined in Commission 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 

Commission except as provided for in Regulation 4.14(a)(9). 

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 7 of 11
8 

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 

23. The Court reserves the determination of further appropriate relief, remedies and 

penalties pursuant to Section 6c of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1. The Court will determine the 

amounts of restitution, disgorgement and civil monetary penalty - and the procedures for payment 

and distribution of these monetary sanctions - by further order upon: motion of the parties 

submitting to the Court a proposed consent order setting out their agreement on the amounts of 

restitution, disgorgement and civil monetary penalty to be paid by Defendant Singh in this matter; 

subsequent motion by the CFTC; and/or hearing before this Court.

24. In connection with any Commission motion seeking further relief or remedies 

including but not limited to restitution, disgorgement and/or civil monetary penalties, and at any 

hearing held on such a motion: (a) Singh will be precluded from arguing that they did not violate 

the federal laws as alleged in the Complaint; (b) Singh may not challenge the validity of the 

consents and agreements herein or this Consent Order; (c) solely for the purposes of such motion, 

the allegations of the Complaint and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in this Consent 

Order shall be accepted as and deemed true by the Court; and (d) the Court may determine the 

issues raised in the motion on the basis of affidavits, declarations, excerpts of sworn deposition or 

investigative testimony, witness testimony, and/or documentary evidence, without regard to the 

standards for summary judgment contained in Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

25. The injunctive and equitable relief provisions of this Consent Order shall be binding 

upon the following persons who receive actual notice of this Consent Order, by personal service 

or otherwise: (1) Defendant; (2) any officer, agent, servant, employee, or attorney of the 

Defendant; and (3) any other persons who are in active concert or participation with any persons 

described in subsections (1) and (2) above. 

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 8 of 11

V. 
9 

26. Entire Agreement and Amendments: This Consent Order incorporates all of the 

terms and conditions of the settlement among the parties hereto to date. Nothing shall serve to 

amend or modify this Consent Order in any respect whatsoever, unless: (a) reduced to writing; 

(b) signed by all parties hereto; and (c) approved by order of this Court. 

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

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

application of the provision to any other person or circumstance shall not be affected by the 

holding. 

28. Waiver: The failure of any party to this Consent Order or of any customer at any 

time to require performance of any provision of this Consent Order shall in no manner affect the 

right of the party or customer at a later time to enforce the same or any other provision of this 

Consent Order. No waiver in one or more instances of the breach of any provision contained in 

this Consent Order shall be deemed to be or construed as a further or continuing waiver of such 

breach or waiver of the breach of any other provision of this Consent Order. 

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

action in order to implement and carry out the terms of all orders and decrees, including orders 

setting the appropriate amounts of restitution, disgorgement and civil monetary penalty, that may 

be entered herein, to entertain any suitable application or motion for additional relief within the 

jurisdiction of the Court, to assure compliance with this Consent Order and for all other purposes 

relevant to this action, including any motion by Singh to modify or for relief from the terms of this 

Consent Order. 

30. This Consent Order may be executed in two or more counterparts, all of which shall 

be considered one and the same agreement and shall become effective when one or more 

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 9 of 11
10 

counterparts have been signed by each of the parties hereto and delivered (by e-mail, or otherwise) 

to the other party, it being understood that all parties need not sign the same counterpart. Any 

counterpart or other signature to this Consent Order that is delivered by any means shall be deemed 

for all purposes as constituting good and valid execution and delivery by such party of this Consent 

Order. 

20. Defendant understands that the terms of the Consent Order are enforceable through 

contempt proceedings, and that, in any such proceedings, he may not challenge the validity of this 

Consent Order. 

 There being no just reason for delay, the Clerk of the Court is hereby directed to enter this 

Consent Order of Judgement as to Liability and Partial Injunctive Relief Against Defendant 

Nishad Singh . 

IT IS SO ORDERED on this _____day of ________________________, 2023. 

 _________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 10 of 11
NINA RUVINSKY Digitally signed by NINA RUVINSKY 

Date: 2023.02.28 08:48:37 -06'00'

Case 1:23-cv-01684 Document 5 Filed 02/28/23 Page 11 of 11

CONSENTED TO AND APPROVED BY: 

Nishad Singh 

Russell Capone 

Date:_z___:_/_~-----'1.___A_,3 __ 

Russell Capone 

Andrew Goldstein 

Anu S. Dhillon 

Cooley LLP 

55 Hudson Yards 

New York, NY 10001-2157 

(212) 479 6580 office 

(212) 479 6275 (fax) 

rcapo ne@coo I ey. com 

agoldste in@cooley.com 

adhillon@cooley.com 

Attorney for Defendant Nishad 

Singh 

11 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission: 

Nina Ruvinsky 

Date: ----------

Nina Ruvinsky 

Carlin Metzger 

Elizabeth N. Pendleton 

Robe11 T. Howell 

Ralph Metcalfe Federal Office Building 

77 W. Jackson, Suite 800 

Chicago, Illinois 60604 

(312) 596-0700 

(312) 596-0714 (fax) 

nruvinsky@cftc.gov 

cmetzger@cftc.gov 

ependleton@cftc.gov 

rhowell@cftc.gov 

Attorneys for Commodity Futures Trading 

Comm;ssion