{"id":1514,"date":"2014-09-11T15:12:27","date_gmt":"2014-09-11T15:12:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.stockbrokerfraudblog.com\/2014\/09\/sec_to_dismiss_lawsuit_against"},"modified":"2022-03-11T13:24:24","modified_gmt":"2022-03-11T19:24:24","slug":"sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/","title":{"rendered":"SEC to Dismiss Lawsuit Against SIPC Over Payments to Stanford Ponzi Scam Victims"},"content":{"rendered":"

\t\t\t\tThe Securities and Exchange Commission has said that it no longer intends to continue trying to get the Securities Investor Protection Corporation to pay back investors the losses they sustained in R. Allen Stanford’s $7 billion Ponzi scam. The decision comes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the regulator failed to prove that the scheme’s victims were “customers” eligible for compensation by the SIPC. That decision upheld an earlier ruling by a district court in 2012.<\/p>\n

Even though the SEC is no longer seeking to compel the brokerage industry insurance fund to pay the investors, the agency says it is committed to the victims and will keep working with the U.S. Department of Justice, the Stanford Receiver, and others in an effort to maximize investor recovery.<\/p>\n

SIPC keeps a special fund to pay back investors if their securities and cash were lost when a brokerage failed. The agency, however, said it couldn’t compensate the Stanford Ponzi scam victims because their losses were not a result of a broker-dealer failing but due to their purchase of CDs from a foreign bank-assets that they are still holding and now have no value. <\/p>\n

Continue Reading \u203a<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Securities and Exchange Commission has said that it no longer intends to continue trying to get the Securities Investor Protection Corporation to pay back investors the losses they sustained in R. Allen Stanford’s $7 billion Ponzi scam. The decision comes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3792],"tags":[2535],"class_list":["post-1514","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ponzi-scams","tag-stanford-ponzi-scam"],"yoast_head":"\nSEC to Dismiss Lawsuit Against SIPC Over Payments to Stanford Ponzi Scam Victims — Investor Lawyers Blog — September 11, 2014<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Securities and Exchange Commission has said that it no longer intends to continue trying to get the Securities Investor Protection Corporation to pay — September 11, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"SEC to Dismiss Lawsuit Against SIPC Over Payments to Stanford Ponzi Scam Victims — Investor Lawyers Blog — September 11, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"The Securities and Exchange Commission has said that it no longer intends to continue trying to get the Securities Investor Protection Corporation to pay — September 11, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SEC to Dismiss Lawsuit Against SIPC Over Payments to Stanford Ponzi Scam Victims — Investor Lawyers Blog — September 11, 2014","description":"The Securities and Exchange Commission has said that it no longer intends to continue trying to get the Securities Investor Protection Corporation to pay — September 11, 2014","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"SEC to Dismiss Lawsuit Against SIPC Over Payments to Stanford Ponzi Scam Victims — Investor Lawyers Blog — September 11, 2014","twitter_description":"The Securities and Exchange Commission has said that it no longer intends to continue trying to get the Securities Investor Protection Corporation to pay — September 11, 2014","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/"},"author":{"name":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431"},"headline":"SEC to Dismiss Lawsuit Against SIPC Over Payments to Stanford Ponzi Scam Victims","datePublished":"2014-09-11T15:12:27+00:00","dateModified":"2022-03-11T19:24:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/"},"wordCount":374,"keywords":["Stanford Ponzi scam"],"articleSection":["Ponzi Scams"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/","url":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/","name":"SEC to Dismiss Lawsuit Against SIPC Over Payments to Stanford Ponzi Scam Victims — Investor Lawyers Blog — September 11, 2014","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2014-09-11T15:12:27+00:00","dateModified":"2022-03-11T19:24:24+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431"},"description":"The Securities and Exchange Commission has said that it no longer intends to continue trying to get the Securities Investor Protection Corporation to pay — September 11, 2014","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/sec-to-dismiss-lawsuit-against\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"SEC to Dismiss Lawsuit Against SIPC Over Payments to Stanford Ponzi Scam Victims"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/","name":"Investor Lawyers Blog","description":"Published By Investment Fraud Attorneys \u2014 Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431","name":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/"]}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pedX9K-oq","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1514","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1514"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1514\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24207,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1514\/revisions\/24207"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1514"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1514"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1514"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}