Judgment Entered Against James Louks and FiberPop Solutions
On November 9, 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced that on November 4, 2015 the Court entered a partial judgment against James Louks and FiberPop Solutions, Inc. (FiberPop). FiberPop and Louks, founder, President, CEO, Director, and Chairman of the Board of FiberPoP, both consented to the entry of the partial judgment, which imposes a permanent injunction against future violations of certain antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws. The Defendants are prohibited from raising investor capital while the SEC’s case is ongoing. They neither admitted nor denied the SEC’s allegations against them.On September 1, 2015 the SEC filed the Complaint charging Louks and FiberPop with fraud. The Complaint claimed that Louks and FiberPop had defrauded nearly 100 investors by convincing them to invest in notes that would theoretically help fund the company’s operations. The SEC alleged that Louks continued to solicit investors while knowing that none of the purported financing opportunities offered by FiberPoP during a 12-year period ever produced funding for the company or returns for investors.
The amount to be paid in disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and civil penalties have yet to be decided upon. The SEC’s Complaint charges Louks and FiberPop with violation of Section 17(a) of the Exchange Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
For further information about this securities law blog post, please contact Brenda Hamilton, Securities Attorney at 101 Plaza Real S, Suite 202 N, Boca Raton, Florida, (561) 416-8956, by email at [email protected] or visit www.securitieslawyer101.com. This securities law blog post is provided as a general informational service to clients and friends of Hamilton & Associates Law Group and should not be construed as, and does not constitute legal advice on any specific matter, nor does this message create an attorney-client relationship. Please note that the prior results discussed herein do not guarantee similar outcomes.