Free Temporary Restraining Order - District Court of California - California


File Size: 55.0 kB
Pages: 3
Date: March 6, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: California
Category: District Court of California
Author: unknown
Word Count: 814 Words, 5,229 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/casd/264823/9.pdf

Download Temporary Restraining Order - District Court of California ( 55.0 kB)


Preview Temporary Restraining Order - District Court of California
Case 3:08-cv-00400-DMS-BLM

Document 9

Filed 03/06/2008

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
On March 5, 2008, this Court granted in part, and denied in part, the Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission's ("Commission") Ex Parte Motion For A Temporary Restraining Order and Orders: (1) Freezing Assets; (2) Appointing a Temporary Receiver; (3) Requiring Accountings; (4) Prohibiting The Destruction Of Documents, (5) Granting Expedited Discovery; and (6) Order To Show Cause Re Preliminary Injunction and Appointment of a Permanent Receiver (the "Order"). Following the issuance of the Order a further telephonic hearing was held on March 5, 2008, concerning the scope of the Order and the Temporary Receiver's powers thereunder. At that telephonic hearing the Commission was represented by Roberto A. Tercero and Donald W. -1TUCO TRADING, LLC and DOUGLAS G. FREDERICK, Defendants. vs. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, Case No. 08-CV-00400 DMS (BLM) SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER TO TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDERS: (1) FREEZING ASSETS; (2) APPOINTING A TEMPORARY RECEIVER; (3) REQUIRING ACCOUNTINGS; (4) PROHIBITING THE DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; (5) GRANTING EXPEDITED DISCOVERY; AND (6) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND APPOINTMENT OF A PERMANENT RECEIVER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:08-cv-00400-DMS-BLM

Document 9

Filed 03/06/2008

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Searles, defendants were represented by Michele R. Fron of Keesel, Young & Logan, and the Temporary Receiver Tom Lennon was represented by David Osias of Allen Matkins, LLP. Based upon that telephonic hearing, the Order is hereby supplemented, as follows: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Tuco and Frederick and their subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and any other persons in active concert or participation with any of them, including members of Tuco, are restrained and enjoined from any and all activity, transactions or other conduct not in the "ordinary course of business" of Tuco. The "ordinary course of business" shall have the same meaning as used in Section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code (11 U.S.C. ยง 363) and construed by the courts. Should the Temporary Receiver advise any of the defendants or others that he does not believe that an activity, transaction or other conduct is in the ordinary course of business, then that activity, transaction or other conduct shall be restrained and enjoined unless and until the Temporary Receiver consents or this Court issues an order authorizing the activity, transaction or other conduct. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, until March 20, 2008, or as otherwise ordered by this Court, Tuco and its subsidiaries, affiliates, members, officers, agents, servants, employees and attorneys shall not withdraw any cash, securities or other assets from any accounts at any bank, financial institution, or brokerage firm, held in the name of, for the benefit of, or over which signatory authority is held by Tuco or its subsidiaries, affiliates, members officers, agents, servants, employees or attorneys or any persons in active concert or participation with any of them, unless the Temporary Receiver confirms that the person or entity requesting the withdrawal: (1) has a contractual right to withdrawal prior to March 20, 2008; or (2) the requested withdrawal is in the ordinary course of business for the specific trader's account at issue; or (3) other exigent circumstances are demonstrated warranting a withdrawal prior to March 20, 2008. In no event shall the authorized withdrawal exceed 50% of the positive net equity in the trader's account at issue. Desire to withdraw funds to trade through another brokerdealer is not an exigent circumstance. The scope of this prohibition shall apply, but is not limited to, the accounts set forth below: -2-

Case 3:08-cv-00400-DMS-BLM

Document 9

Filed 03/06/2008

Page 3 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Bank/ Entity Name GLB Trading, Inc.

Account Name Tuco Trading LLC Master Account of YU31

Account Number(s) 2131-4075

GLB Trading, Inc.

Tuco Trading LLC SubAccount #1 of 21314075

2132-0155

GLB Trading, Inc. JP Morgan Chase Bank

Tuco Trading, LLC Tuco Trading LLC Operating Account

2131-7813 000000722923067

JP Morgan Chase Bank

Tuco Trading LLC Tuco Wire Account

000000722923075

Wedbush Financial

Tuco Trading LLC c/o Doug Frederick

8244-9330

Wedbush Financial

Tuco Trading LLC Income and Expense Account

8244-9331

Evolution Financial View Trade MF Global, Inc. Advantage Futures, LLC

Tuco Trading LLC Tuco Trading LLC Tuco Trading LLC Tuco Trading LLC-Mstr

1153-2603 4936-3559 E-480-HSP1-SP404 MH006-A0535

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Temporary Receiver shall file and serve his accounting and report by March 14, 2008 and be present, with his accountant, at Court on March 19, 2008. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: March 6, 2008 _______________________________________ ________________________________ _ _______ ______ ___ ____ ____ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-3-