UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE No.: 1:20-cv-21887-GAYLES/OTAZO-REYES

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff, 

v.

DANIEL FINGERGUT, ET AL.,

Defendants.

AICEL CARBONERO

Relief Defendant.

________________________________________/

CONSENT ORDER FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND OTHER STATUTORY

AND EQUITABLE RELIEF AGAINST DIGITAL PLATINUM LTD., 

TAL VALARIOLA AND ITAY BARAK

I. INTRODUCTION

On May 5, 2020, Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission” 

or “CFTC”) filed a Complaint against Defendants Daniel Fingerhut (“Fingerhut”), Digital 

Platinum Ltd (“DPL”), Digital Platinum, Inc. (“DPI”), Huf Mediya, Tal Valariola 

(“Valariola”), and Itay Barak (“Barak”) (collectively “Defendants”), and Relief Defendant 

Aicel Carbonero, 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 

(2018), and the Commission’s Regulations (“Regulations”) promulgated thereunder, 

17 C.F.R. pts. 1-190 (2020). [ECF No. 1]. On May 6, 2020, the Commission sought the 

appointment of a temporary receiver and entry of a preliminary injunction. [ECF Nos. 12 & 

13]. The Court entered a Temporary Receiver Order (“TRO”) on May 8, 2020, ordering 

appointment of Melanie Damian of Damian & Valori LLP, 1000 Brickell Ave., Suite 1020, 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 1 of 29
2

Miami, FL 33131, as Temporary Receiver, with full powers of an equity receiver, an 

accounting, and other equitable relief. [ECF No. 33]. The Commission filed an Amended 

Complaint on June 12, 2020. [ECF No. 101]. 1 The Commission also sought a statutory 

restraining order (“SRO”), see Section 6c(b) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(b) (2018), which 

the Court granted on July 13, 2020. [ECF Nos. 58 & 129]. On January 7, 2021, the Court 

entered an Order for Preliminary Injunction and Other Ancillary Relief Against the 

Defendants.2 [ECF No. 199].

II. CONSENTS AND AGREEMENTS

To effect settlement of all charges alleged in the Amended Complaint against Defendants 

Digital Platinum Ltd., Tal Valariola and Itay Barak (collectively the “Israeli Defendants”), 

without a trial on the merits or any further judicial proceedings, the Israeli Defendants:

1. Consent to the entry of this Consent Order for Permanent Injunction, Civil 

Monetary Penalty and Other Equitable Relief Against the Israeli Defendants (“Consent 

Order”);

2. Affirm that they have 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 

Commission or any member, officer, agent or representative thereof, or by any other person, to 

induce consent to this Consent Order;

3. Acknowledge service of the summons and Amended Complaint;

1 The Amended Complaint did not alter the allegations against the Israeli Defendants, but rather addressed 

service of process issues. 

2 The CEA contemplates entry of “permanent or temporary injunction[s]” as well as “restraining order[s].” 

7 U.S.C. § 13a–1(b). Only a preliminary injunction can stay in place until a trial on the merits. Id.; see Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 65. Huf Mediya had not yet been served and was not included within the scope of the Preliminary 

Injunction.

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 2 of 29
3

4. Admit the jurisdiction of this Court over them and the subject matter of this action 

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

5. Admit the jurisdiction of the Commission over the conduct and transactions at 

issue in this action pursuant to the Act;

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

Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(e);

7. Waive:

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

Justice Act, 5 U.S.C. § 504 (2018) and 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (2018), and/or 

the rules promulgated by the Commission in conformity therewith, Part 

148 of the Regulations, 17 C.F.R. pt. 148 (2020), relating to, or arising 

from, this action;

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

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

§§ 201–53, 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

(d) Any and all rights of appeal from this action;

8. Consent to the continued jurisdiction of this Court over them for the purpose of 

implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of this Consent Order and for any other 

purpose relevant to this action, even if the Israeli Defendants now or in the future reside outside 

the jurisdiction of this Court;

9. Agree that they will not oppose enforcement of this Consent Order on the ground, 

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

hereby waives any objection based thereon;

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 3 of 29
4

10. Agree that neither they nor any of their agents or employees under their authority 

or control shall take any action or make any public statement denying, directly or indirectly, any 

allegation in the Amended Complaint, or creating or tending to create the impression that the 

Amended Complaint and/or this Consent Order is without a factual basis; provided, however, that 

nothing in this provision shall affect their: (a) testimonial obligations; or (b) right to take legal 

positions in other proceedings to which the Commission is not a party. The Israeli Defendants

shall comply with this agreement, and shall undertake all steps necessary to ensure that all of their 

agents and/or employees under their authority or control understand and comply with this 

agreement.

11. Consent to the entry of this Consent Order without admitting or denying the 

allegations of the Amended Complaint or any findings or conclusions in this Consent Order, 

except asto jurisdiction and venue, which they admit for purposes of this action;

12. Consent to the use of the findings and conclusions in this Consent Order in this 

proceeding and, subject to paragraph 13, below, in any other proceeding brought by the 

Commission or the Receiver or to which the Commission or the Receiver is a party or claimant, 

and agree that they shall be taken as true and correct and be given preclusive effect therein, 

without further proof;

13. Do not consent, however, to the use of this Consent Order, or the findings and 

conclusions herein, as the sole basis for any other proceeding brought by the Commission or the 

Receiver, or to which the Commission or Receiver is a party, other than a: statutory 

disqualification proceeding, proceeding in bankruptcy, or receivership, or proceeding to enforce 

the terms of this Order;

14. Agree to provide immediate notice to this Court and the Commission by certified 

mail, in the manner required by paragraph 60 of Part VI of this Consent Order, of any bankruptcy 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 4 of 29
5

proceeding filed by, on behalf of, or against them, whether inside or outside the United States;

and

15. Agree 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 the Israeli

Defendants in any other proceeding, except that as to DPL, leave of Court is necessary to pursue 

any action against DPL for so long as it remains under the control of the Receiver.

III. FINDINGS OF FACTS 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 Court therefore directs the 

entry of the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, permanent injunction and equitable 

relief pursuant to Section 6c of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1 (2018), as set forth herein. The findings 

and conclusions in this Consent Order are not binding on any other party to this action or on any 

party to any other action except as set forth in paragraphs 12-13 above.

THE COURT HEREBY FINDS:

A. Findings of Fact

16. Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission is an independent federal 

regulatory agency that is charged by Congress with administering and enforcing the Act, and the 

Regulations.

17. Defendant Itay Barak (“Barak”) is an individual who resides in Tel Aviv, Israel. 

Barak has never been registered with the Commission in any capacity.

18. Defendant Tal Valariola (“Valariola”) is an individual who resides in Tel Aviv, 

Israel. Valariola has never been registered with the Commission in any capacity.

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 5 of 29
6

19. Defendant Digital Platinum Ltd (“DPL”) is an Israeli company with its 

principal place of business in Tel Aviv, Israel. At all times relevant, Valariola and Barak owned 

and controlled DPL. DPL has never been registered with the Commission in any capacity. 

B. Conclusions of Law

Jurisdiction and Venue

20. This Court possesses jurisdiction over this action pursuant 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). Section 6c(a) of the Act, 

7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(a) (2018) provides that the Commission may bring actions for injunctive relief 

or to enforce compliance with the Act or any rule, regulation, or order thereunder in the proper 

district court of the United States 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.

21. Venue properly lies with this Court pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(e), because the 

acts and practices in violation of the Act occurred within this District.

Options Fraud

22. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint and here, the Israeli 

Defendants willfully aided and abetted All In Publishing and its principal Timothy Atkinson’s 

(together, “AIP”) options fraud, see Consent Order of Permanent Injunction and Other Statutory 

and Injunctive Relief Against Timothy Joseph Atkinson and All In Publishing, LLC, CFTC v. 

Atkinson, No. 18-cv-23992-JEM, (S.D. Fla. May 22, 2019), ECF No. 206, because they: (i) had 

knowledge of their AIP’s intent to commit a violation; and (ii) intentionally assisted the primary 

wrongdoers. DPL intentionally assisted AIP, which intentionally or recklessly used fraudulent 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 6 of 29
7

solicitations in emails, websites and fictitious videos promising free access to trading systems 

to induce prospective customers to open and fund binary options trading accounts with a 

recommended broker in violation of Section 4c(b) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6c(b) (2018), and 

Commission Regulation 32.4, 17 C.F.R. § 32.4 (2020), so that the Israeli Defendants could earn 

commissions.

23. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint, DPL is liable as a principal 

for Valariola’s and Barak’s violations pursuant to Section 2(a)(1)(B) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 

§ 2(a)(1)(B) (2018), and Regulation 1.2, 17 C.F.R. § 1.2 (2020), because their acts, omissions 

and/or failures occurred within the scope of their employment or agency with DPL. 

24. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint, Valariola and Barak are 

liable as control persons of DPL pursuant to Section 13(b) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13c(b) (2018), 

because they controlled DPL and did not act in good faith or knowingly induced, directly or 

indirectly, the acts constituting DPL’s violations. 

Manipulative & Deceptive Device, Scheme or Artifice 

Binary Options Swaps Fraud 

25. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint, the Israeli Defendants’ 

campaigns marketed free access to trading systems for trading swaps, as defined by the Act. The 

Israeli Defendants intentionally or recklessly used fraudulent solicitations in emails, websites, 

and fictitious videos promising free access to their trading systems to induce prospective 

customers to go through their funnel and open and fund binary options trading accounts with 

their recommended broker to earn commissions. 

26. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint, DPL, between October 2013 

and November 2016, willfully aided and abetted AIP’s binary options campaigns by supplying 

certain false sales videos, knowing AIP used similarly materially false or misleading statements 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 7 of 29
8

in video and email solicitations that it created and disseminated to prospective customers, sharing 

those solicitations with brokers and encouraging their use in the brokers’ further solicitations, 

serving as an intermediary with the brokers, supplying the trading systems that did not operate as 

marketed, and handling the commissions resulting from the fraud. Therefore, pursuant to Section 

13(a) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. §13c(a) (2016), DPL is liable for AIP’s and its employees’ violations 

of Section 6(c)(1) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) (2018), and Regulation 180.1(a)(1)-(3), 17 C.F.R. 

§ 180.1(a)(1)-(3) (2020). 

27. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint, Valariola and Barak, 

between October 2013 and November 2016, willfully aided and abetted DPL’s violations of 

7 U.S.C. § 9(1) and 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)-(3) within the scope of their employment, office or 

agency with DPL. DPL is therefore liable for Valariola’s and Barak’s acts, omissions, and failures 

constituting violations of 7 U.S.C. § 6c(b) and 17 C.F.R. § 32.4 pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(B) 

and 17 C.F.R. § 1.2.

28. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint, Valariola and Barak

controlled DPL between October 2013 and November 2016. Valariola and Barak failed to act in 

good faith and/or knowingly induced DPL’s violations alleged herein. Valariola and Barak are 

therefore liable for DPL’s violations as controlling persons pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 13c(b).

Digital Assets Commodity and Swaps Fraud 

29. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint, between November 2016 

and August 2018, the Israeli Defendants’ campaigns marketed free access to trading systems for 

trading digital assets, as defined by the Act. The Israeli Defendants intentionally or recklessly 

used or directed its subsidiary to use fraudulent solicitations in emails, websites, and fictitious 

videos promising free access to their trading systems to induce prospective customers to go 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 8 of 29
9

through their funnel and open and fund digital asset trading accounts with their recommended 

broker to earn commissions. 

30. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint, DPL, between November 

2016 and August 2018, through its wholly owned subsidiary, fraudulently solicited prospective 

customers to open and fund digital asset trading accounts by distributing emails and videos that 

included materially false or misleading statements, serving as an intermediary with the brokers, 

supplying the trading systems that did not operate as marketed, and handling the commissions 

resulting from the fraud. Therefore, DPL violated 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) and 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)-(3).

31. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint, Valariola and Barak, 

between November 2016 and August 2018, violated 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) and 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)-

(3) within the scope of their employment, office or agency with DPL. DPL is therefore liable for 

Valariola’s and Barak’s acts, omissions, and failures constituting violations of 7 U.S.C. § 9(1) and 

17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)-(3) pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(B) and 17 C.F.R. §1.2.

32. By the conduct described in the Amended Complaint, Valariola and Barak

controlled DPL between November 2016 and August 2018. Valariola and Barak failed to act in 

good faith and/or knowingly induced DPL’s violations alleged herein during that time period. 

Valariola and Barak are therefore liable for DPL’s violations as controlling persons pursuant to 

7 U.S.C. § 13c(b).

IV. PERMANENT INJUNCTION

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

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

of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1 (2018), the Israeli Defendants are permanently restrained, enjoined 

and prohibited from directly or indirectly:

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 9 of 29
10

a. Using fraudulent solicitations in emails, websites and fictitious videos that 

promise free access to trading systems to induce prospective customers to open 

and fund binary options and digital assets trading accounts with a recommended 

broker so that the Israeli Defendants can earn commissions, in violation of 

Section 4c(b) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6c(b) (2018), and Regulation 32.4, 17C.F.R.

§ 32.4 (2020); and

b. Directly or indirectly, in connection with any swap, or contract of sale of any 

commodity 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 devices, schemes, and artifices to 

defraud; (2) make, or attempt to make, untrue or misleading statements of a 

material factor or omit to state material facts necessary in order to make 

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

in acts, practices, and courses of business, which operate or would operate as a 

fraud or deceit upon any person in connection with swap transactions, by using 

fraudulent solicitations in emails, websites and fictitious sales videos that 

promise free access to trading systems to induce prospective customers to go 

through their website funnel and open and fund a binary options and/or digital 

asset trading accounts with their recommended broker to earn commissions, in 

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

180.1(a)(1)-(3), 17 C.F.R. § 180.1(a)(1)-(3) (2020).

34. The Israeli Defendants are also permanently restrained, enjoined, and prohibited 

from directly or indirectly:

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 10 of 29
11

a. Trading, offering to enter into, entering into, confirming the execution of,

maintaining positions in, or otherwise conducting transactions or activities relating 

to digital assets or any “commodity interest” (as that term is defined in Regulation 

1.3, 17 C.F.R. § 1.3 (2020), which encompasses binary options), to any person or 

entity residing in the United States or who enters transactions involving those 

financial products on or subject to the rules of any registered entity (as that term is 

defined in 7 U.S.C. § 1a(40) (2018));

b. Soliciting, receiving or accepting any funds from any person or entity residing in 

the United States for the purpose of conducting transactions or activities relating 

to digital assets or any commodity interest (as that term is defined in 17 C.F.R. 

§ 1.3)); 

c. Offering autotrading systems or services that purport to trade digital assets or 

any commodity interest (as that term is defined in 17 C.F.R. § 1.3), to any person 

or entity residing in the United States or who enters transactions involving those 

financial products on or subject to the rules of any registered entity (as that term

is defined in 7 U.S.C. § 1a(40) (2018));

d. Acting as an affiliate marketer in any capacity that involves the marketing of digital 

assets or any commodity interest (as that term is defined in 17 C.F.R. § 1.3), to any 

person or entity residing in the United States or who enters transactions involving 

those financial products on or subject to the rules of any registered entity (as that 

term is defined in 7 U.S.C. § 1a(40) (2018));

e. Applying for registration or claiming exemption from registration with the 

Commission in any capacity, and engaging in any activity requiring such 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 11 of 29
12

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) (2020); and/or

f. Acting as a principal (as that term is defined in Regulation 3.1(a), 17C.F.R. § 3.1(a) 

(2020)), agent or any other officer or employee of any person (as that term is 

defined in Section 1a(38) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 1a(38) (2012)), 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).

V. OTHER STATUTORY AND EQUITABLE RELIEF

35. The current Court-appointed Temporary Receiver is hereby appointed Permanent 

Receiver with respect to the Israeli Defendants’ assets, subject to the exemptions below, and is 

granted the full powers of a federal equity receiver, including without limitation: (i) all powers 

previously granted to the Temporary Receiver in this Court’s Consent Order for Preliminary 

Injunction and Other Ancillary Relief Against Defendants Digital Platinum Ltd., Tal Valariola 

and Itay Barak, [ECF No. 199]; (ii) the right, upon Court approval, to market and sell all assets of 

the DPL except as noted in Paragraph 58 below; and (iii) the right and discretion to pursue (a) any 

actions necessary to recover assets, wheresoever located, of the Israeli Defendants and/or of the 

Receivership Estate, and (b) any actions on behalf of the creditors of the Receivership Estate 

and/or the Israeli Defendants. However, Valariola and Barak’s earnings, “funds, assets, or other 

property” (as these terms are defined in ECF No. 199) that are considered “exempt” under federal 

law or the law of the country in which they reside are neither subject to the Permanent Receiver’s 

powers above nor this paragraph. This Consent Order shall not preclude Valariola and Barak from 

seeking any additional exemptions from the Permanent Receiver’s powers above, and shall be 

without prejudice to Valariola’s and Barak’s ability to otherwise seek any exemption from, or 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 12 of 29
13

modification to, this paragraph; the Commission and the Permanent Receiver reserve the right to 

oppose any such exemption or modification.

A. Disgorgement

36. The Israeli Defendants shall pay, jointly and severally, disgorgement in the 

amount of three million dollars ($3,000,000 USD) (“Disgorgement Obligation”), in connection 

with their violations. If the Disgorgement Obligation is not paid immediately, then post-judgment 

interest shall accrue on the Disgorgement Obligation beginning on the date of entry of this Consent 

Order and shall be determined by using the one-month Treasury Bill rate prevailing on the date of 

entry of this Consent Order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961 (2018).

37. The Permanent Receiver shall receive disgorgement payments from the Israeli 

Defendants and make distributions as set forth below.

38. The Israeli Defendants shall make Disgorgement Obligation payments, and any 

post-judgment interest payments, under this Consent Order to the Permanent Receiver in the 

name “DPL Receivership Estate” and shall send such payments by electronic funds transfer, or

by U.S. postal money order, certified check, bank cashier’s check, or bank money order, to the 

Permanent Receiver at the office of Damian & Valori LLP, 1000 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1020, 

Miami, Florida 33131, under cover letter that identifies the paying Defendant(s) and the name 

and docket number of this proceeding. The Israeli Defendants shall simultaneously transmit 

copies of the cover letter and the form of payment to the Chief Financial Officer, Commodity 

Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 

20581.

39. The CFTC and the Permanent Receiver acknowledge that before the date of this 

Consent Order, DPL and/or DPL’s banking institution(s) delivered to the Receiver, and Receiver 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 13 of 29
14

received, $1,195,965.82, which amount shall be applied toward the Israeli Defendants’ 

$3,000,000 Disgorgement Obligation and shall be deemed a partial satisfaction thereof. 

40. The CFTC and the Permanent Receiver acknowledge that on or about June 18, 

2020, Baker Botts LLP, counsel for Defendants Valariola and Barak, delivered to the Receiver, 

and the Receiver received, $194,358.60, which amount shall also be applied toward the Israeli 

Defendants’ $3,000,000 Disgorgement Obligation and shall be deemed a partial satisfaction 

thereof. To the extent that Valariola and Barak’s motion for release of legal fees, [ECF No. 197],

is granted, any portion of the funds held by Receiver that are paid to Baker Botts LLP shall be 

excluded from this credit. 

41. The Permanent Receiver shall oversee the Disgorgement Obligation and shall 

have the discretion to determine the manner of distribution of such funds in an equitable fashion 

to the Israeli Defendants’ customers identified by the Commission or through her

investigation and as approved by the Court or may defer distribution until such time as the 

Permanent Receiver deems appropriate. The Permanent Receiver shall propose a consolidated 

plan for the distribution of the disgorgement amount to the Court within ninety days of the date of 

entry of this Order. In the event that the amount of Disgorgement Obligation payments to the 

Permanent Receiver are of a de minimis nature such that the Permanent Receiver determines that 

the administrative cost of making a distribution to eligible participants is impractical, the 

Permanent Receiver may, in her discretion, treat such disgorgement payments as civil monetary 

penalty payments, which the Permanent Receiver shall forward to the Commission following the 

instructions for civil monetary penalty payments set forth in Part B below.

42. Funds or assets obtained by the Permanent Receiver through settlement with, or 

disgorgement or clawback proceedings against, third party recipients or transferees of the Israeli 

Defendants (“clawbacks”), less the Permanent Receiver’s costs and fees incurred in obtaining each 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 14 of 29
15

respective clawback, shall be applied first toward the Israeli Defendants’ $3,000,000 

Disgorgement Obligation, and upon satisfaction of the Disgorgement Amount shall thereafter be 

applied toward the Israeli Defendant’s CMP Obligation as defined in paragraph 48 below.

43. Subject to any applicable privilege, the Israeli Defendants shall cooperate with the 

Permanent Receiver as appropriate to provide such information as the Permanent Receiver deems 

necessary and appropriate to identify the Israeli Defendants’ customers to whom the Permanent 

Receiver, in her sole discretion, may determine to include in any plan for distribution of any 

Disgorgement Obligation payments. Subject to any applicable privilege, the Israeli Defendants 

shall execute any documents necessary to release funds that they have in any repository, bank, 

investment or other financial institution, wherever located, in order to make partial or total 

payment toward the Disgorgement Obligation.

44. Until discharged by the Court, the Permanent Receiver shall also provide the 

Commission at the beginning of each calendar year with a report detailing the disbursement of 

funds. The Permanent Receiver shall transmit this report under a cover letter that identifies the 

name and docket number of this proceeding to the Chief Financial Officer, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20581.

45. The amounts payable to each participant shall not limit the ability of any participant 

from proving that a greater amount is owed from the Israeli Defendants or any other person or 

entity, and nothing herein shall be construed in any way to limit or abridge the rights of any 

customer that exist under state or common law, except that absent leave of Court no action may 

be initiated against DPL or Melanie E. Damian as the Permanent Receiver of DPL.

46. Pursuant to Rule 71 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, each customer of the 

Israeli Defendants who suffered a loss is explicitly made an intended third-party beneficiary of

this Consent Order and may, upon approval by the Permanent Receiver during the Receivership

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 15 of 29
16

or otherwise after termination of the Receivership, seek to enforce obedience of this Consent 

Order to obtain satisfaction of any portion of the disgorgement that has not been paid by Israeli 

Defendants to ensure continued compliance with any provision of this Consent Order and to hold 

Valariola and Barak in contempt for any violations of any provision of this Consent Order.

47. To the extent that any funds accrue to the U.S. Treasury for satisfaction of the 

Israeli Defendant’s Disgorgement Obligation, such funds shall be transferred to the Permanent 

Receiver for disbursement in accordance with the procedures set forth above.

B. Civil Monetary Penalty

48. The Israeli Defendants shall pay, jointly and severally, a civil monetary penalty 

in the amount of three million dollars ($3,000,000 USD) (“CMP Obligation”). If the CMP 

Obligation is not paid immediately, then post-judgment interest shall accrue on the CMP 

Obligation beginning on the date of entry of this Consent Order and shall be determined by using 

the one-month Treasury Bill rate prevailing on the date of entry of this Consent Order pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1961 (2018).

49. The Israeli Defendants shall pay their CMP Obligation by electronic funds transfer, 

U.S. postal money order, certified check, bank cashier’s check, or bank money order. If payment 

is to be made other than by electronic funds transfer, then the payment shall be made payable to 

the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and sent to the address below:

MMAC/ESC/AMK326

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

Division of Enforcement

6500 S. MacArthur Blvd. 

HQ Room 181

Oklahoma City, OK 73169

(405) 954-6569 office 

(405) 954-1620 fax

9-AMC-AR-CFTC@faa.gov

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 16 of 29
17

If payment by electronic funds transfer is chosen, the Israeli Defendants shall contact Marie 

Thorne or her successor at the address above to receive payment instructions and shall fully 

comply with those instructions. The Israeli Defendants shall accompany payment of the CMP 

Obligation with a cover letter that identifies the Israeli Defendants and the name and docket 

number of this proceeding. The Israeli Defendants shall simultaneously transmit copies of the 

cover letter and the form of payment to the Chief Financial Officer, Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20581.

50. With regard to funds accumulated by the Permanent Receiver, the funds shall be 

distributed first to satisfy the Disgorgement Obligation, and second to satisfy the CMP if funds are 

available. The Permanent Receiver shall provide written notice in accordance with Paragraph 60

to the Israeli Defendants of any partial and/or complete satisfaction of these obligations. 

C. Provisions Related to Monetary Sanctions

51. Partial Satisfaction: Acceptance by the Commission or the Permanent Receiver 

of any partial payment of the Israeli Defendants’ Disgorgement Obligation or CMP Obligation 

shall not be deemed a waiver of their obligation to make further payments pursuant to this 

Consent Order, or a waiver of the Commission’s right to seek to compel payment of any 

remaining balance.

52. Within seven (7) days of the Israeli Defendants’ satisfaction in full of the 

$3,000,000 Disgorgement Obligation and the $3,000,000 CMP Obligation ($6,000,000 total 

combined Monetary Sanctions), the Permanent Receiver shall so notify the Court. As of the date 

of such notification, any Orders freezing or restraining the Israeli Defendants’ assets shall be 

deemed lifted and extinguished, and the Permanent Receiver’s receivership over the Israeli 

Defendants shall be deemed lifted, extinguished, and dissolved, except to the extent that the 

Receiver is involved in the actions needed to distribute such funds to investors. To the extent 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 17 of 29
18

that further Court order may be required, or deemed necessary or desirable, to effectuate the 

intent and purpose of this paragraph, the Permanent Receiver shall include with the notice to the 

Court a motion requesting that the Court lift and extinguish any Orders freezing or restraining 

the Israeli Defendants’ assets, and requesting that the Court lift, extinguish, and dissolve the 

receivership over the Israeli Defendants. The CFTC agrees to either join in or to not oppose any 

such motion by the Permanent Receiver.

D. Cooperation of Israeli Defendants

53. Subject to any applicable privilege, the Israeli Defendants shall cooperate fully and 

expeditiously with the CFTC, including the CFTC’s Division of Enforcement, in this action and 

in any current or future Commission investigation related to the subject matter of this action. As 

part of such cooperation, subject to any applicable privilege, including but not limited to the Fifth 

Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, the Israeli Defendants shall comply, to the full 

extent of their abilities, promptly and truthfully with any reasonable inquiries or requests for 

information including but not limited to, requests for production of documents and authentication 

of documents within their possession, custody, or control, shall provide assistance at any trial, 

proceeding, or investigation related to the subject matter of this action, including but not limited 

to, requests for testimony, depositions, and/or interviews. Should the CFTC file any additional 

actions related to the subject matter of this action, the Israeli Defendants are directed to appear in 

the judicial district in which such actions are pending, or in a suitable judicial district agreed to by 

the parties, to provide deposition testimony and trial testimony, subject to any applicable privilege, 

including but not limited to the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, should such 

testimony be necessary. To the extent that any of the foregoing would otherwise require a personal 

appearance, Israeli Defendants shall be entitled to appear by live video or, should the permission 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 18 of 29
19

of a court be required, the Commission, the Receiver, and the respective Israeli Defendants shall 

move the court jointly for an order authorizing the respective Israeli Defendant to appear by video.

54. The Israeli Defendants shall also cooperate, subject to any applicable privilege,

including but not limited to the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, and subject 

to the provisions regarding appearance by video set forth in paragraph 53 above, in any 

investigation, civil litigation or administrative matter related to, or arising from, this action with 

the CFTC and the Permanent Receiver.

55. The Israeli Defendants and all other persons or entities served with a copy of this 

Order shall, subject to any applicable privilege, cooperate fully with all reasonable requests of the 

Permanent Receiver including transferring funds at the Permanent Receiver’s direction and 

producing records related to the Israeli Defendants’ accounts as well as providing such information 

as the Permanent Receiver deems necessary and appropriate to identify the Israeli Defendants’

customers to whom the Permanent Receiver, in her sole discretion, may determine to include in 

any plan for distribution of any restitution or disgorgement payments.

E. Cooperation of Third Parties

56. During the Receivership, any financial or brokerage institution, business entity, or 

person that receives actual notice of this Order by personal service or through other means 

(including without limitation by U.S. Mail, overnight courier, email, or facsimile) and holds, 

controls, or maintains custody of any account, asset, records, or other property titled in the name 

of, held for the benefit of, or otherwise under the control of the Israeli Defendants, or has held, 

controlled, or maintained custody of any such account, asset, records or other property of the Israeli

Defendants at any time since January 2013, except as directed by further order of the Court, and 

after the Permanent Receiver provides at least three business days’ notice to Valariola and Barak

shall not:

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 19 of 29
20

a. permit the Israeli Defendants or other persons or entities to withdraw, 

transfer, remove, dissipate, or otherwise dispose of the Israeli Defendants’ 

assets or records deposited into an account in the name of, or acquired by the 

Israeli Defendants prior to the entry of this Consent Order;

b. directly or indirectly destroy, alter, or dispose of, in any manner, any records 

relating to the business activities and business and personal finances of the 

Israeli Defendants; and

c. deny a request by the Commission or the Permanent Receiver to inspect all 

records pertaining to every account or asset owned, controlled, managed, or 

held by, on behalf of, or for the benefit of the Israeli Defendants, including, 

but not limited to, originals or copies of account applications, account 

statements, signature cards, checks, drafts, deposit tickets, transfers to and 

from the accounts, all other debit and credit instruments or slips, currency 

transaction reports, 1099 forms, safe deposit box logs, and all 

communications with the Israeli Defendants. As an alternative to allowing 

inspection of records, a financial or brokerage institution, business entity or 

other person may provide copies of records requested by the Commission or 

the Permanent Receiver.

57. Furthermore, during the Receivership, any such financial or brokerage institution, 

business entity, or person that receives actual notice of this Order, within ten business days of a 

request by the Permanent Receiver, or such longer period specified by the Permanent Receiver, 

and after the Permanent Receiver has provided at least three business days’ notice to Valariola 

and Barak, shall:

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 20 of 29
21

a. turn over to the Permanent Receiver possession and custody of all funds, 

assets, and other property owned, controlled, managed, or held by, on behalf 

of, or for the benefit of the Israeli Defendants, either individually or jointly 

that were deposited into an account in the name of, or acquired between 

October 1, 2013 and August 31, 2018 (the “Relevant Time Period”) and prior

to the date of this Consent Order;

b. provide the Permanent Receiver with copies of all records pertaining to any

account or asset owned, controlled, managed, or held by, on behalf of, or for 

the benefit of the Israeli Defendants, either individually or jointly, including, 

but not limited to, originals or copies of account applications, account 

statements, signature cards, checks, drafts, deposit tickets, transfers to and 

from the accounts, all other debit and credit instruments or slips, currency 

transaction reports, 1099 forms, safe deposit box logs, and all 

communications with the Israeli Defendants;

c. provide the Permanent Receiver with all usernames and passwords to all 

accounts, to gain or secure access to any of the assets or records, created, 

acquired, used and/or maintained by any of the Israeli Defendants prior to 

the entry of this Consent Order, and provide the Permanent Receiver with 

view-only access to all accounts created, acquired, used and/or maintained 

by the Israeli Defendants on or after the date this Consent Order is entered, 

and report to the Permanent Receiver by e-mail on a monthly basis until the 

disgorgement obligation is fulfilled setting forth income received or assets 

acquired; and

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 21 of 29
22

d. cooperate with all reasonable requests of the Permanent Receiver relating to 

implementation of this Order.

VI. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

58. The Court lifts and extinguishes any Orders freezing or restraining assets that 

Israeli Defendants acquire and/or earn after the date of the entry of this Order; this includes the

asset freeze provisions in paragraphs III.D.2 and IV.6 of the Order Granting Motion for 

Preliminary Injunction, entered January 7, 2021, ECF No. 199. Except as otherwise provided in 

this Consent Order, Israeli Defendants’ assets acquired and/or earned prior to the date of the entry 

of this Consent Order and during the Relevant Time Period shall remain frozen pending further 

order of the Court.

59. The Permanent Receiver shall continue to file periodic reports with the Court 

summarizing efforts to marshal and collect assets and administer the Receivership Estate. 

Notice: 

60. All notices required to be given by any provision in this Consent Order shall 

be sent by email or by certified mail, return receipt requested, as follows:

Notice to Commission:

Deputy Director, Division of Enforcement 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

525 West Monroe Street, Suite 1100

Chicago, IL 60661

rhowell@cftc.gov

Notice to Valariola:

Seth Taube

Baker Botts LLP

30 Rockefeller Plaza

New York, NY 10112

seth.taube@bakerbotts.com

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 22 of 29
23

Notice to Barak:

Seth Taube

Baker Botts LLP

30 Rockefeller Plaza

New York, NY 10112

seth.taube@bakerbotts.com

Notice to DPL:

Melanie Damian, Permanent Receiver 

Damian & Valori LLP

1000 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1020

Miami, FL 33131

All such notices to the Commission shall reference the name and docket number of this action.

61. Compensation for the Permanent Receiver: The Permanent Receiver and all 

personnel she hired as previously authorized by the Court, including counsel to the Receiver, 

remain entitled to reasonable compensation for the performance of duties pursuant to this Consent 

Order and for the cost of actual out-of-pocket expenses incurred by them for those services 

authorized by this Consent Order. However, the Permanent Receiver and any personnel she hired 

shall not be compensated or reimbursed by, or otherwise be entitled to, any funds from the Court 

or the CFTC. The Permanent Receiver shall file with the Court and serve on the parties periodic 

requests for the payment of such reasonable compensation on at least a quarterly basis.

62. Change of Address/Phone: Until such time as the Israeli Defendants satisfy in full 

their Disgorgement Obligation and CMP Obligation as set forth in this Consent Order, the Israeli

Defendants shall provide written notice to the Commission and the Permanent Receiver by 

certified mail of any change to their telephone number and mailing address within ten calendar 

days of the change.

63. 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 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 23 of 29
24

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.

64. 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.

65. Waiver: The failure of any party to this Consent Order or of any participant at any 

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

right of the party or participant 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.

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

action to ensure compliance with this Consent Order and for all other purposes related to this 

action, including any motion by the Israeli Defendants to modify or for relief from the terms of 

this Consent Order.

67. Injunctive and Equitable Relief Provisions: The injunctive and equitable relief 

provisions of this Consent Order shall be binding upon the Israeli Defendants, upon any person 

under their authority or control, and upon any person who receives actual notice of this Consent Order, 

by personal service, e-mail, facsimile or otherwise insofar as he or she is acting in active concert 

or participation with the Israeli Defendants.

68. Counterparts and Facsimile Execution: 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 counterparts have been signed by each of the parties hereto 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 24 of 29
25

and delivered (by facsimile, 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.

69. Contempt: the Israeli Defendants understand that the terms of the Consent Order 

are enforceable through contempt proceedings, and that, in any such proceedings they may not 

challenge the validity of this Consent Order.

70. Agreements and Undertakings: the Israeli Defendants shall comply with all of 

the undertakings and agreements set forth in this Consent Order.

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

Consent Order for Permanent Injunction and Other Statutory and Equitable Relief Against Digital 

Platinum Ltd, Tal Valariola and Itay Barak forthwith and without further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 17th day of November, 2021.

_______________________________________

DARRIN P. GAYLES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 25 of 29
Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 26 of 29
Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 27 of 29
Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 28 of 29
CONSENTED AND APPROVED BY:

 

___________________________________ 

Digital Platinum, Ltd. 

Date: ___________________ 

___________________________________ 

Itay Barak 

Date: ___________________ 

___________________________________ 

Tal Valariola 

Date: ___________________ 

APPROVED AS TO FORM: 

___________________________________ 

Seth Taube 

Attorney for Defendants Itay Barak and Tal 

Valariola 

Date: ___________________ 

___________________________________ 

Jason Pickholz 

Attorney for Defendant Digital Platinum, 

Ltd. 

Date: ___________________ 

_/s/ Allison V. Passman__________________ 

Allison Passman 

Chief Trial Attorney 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

525 West Monroe Street 

Chicago, IL 60661 

312-596-0704

apassman@cftc.gov 

Dated ____10/6/2021____________________ 

Case 1:20-cv-21887-DPG Document 284 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/17/2021 Page 29 of 29