SEC v. Christopher R. Esposito, et al. (undisclosed control blocks, 2018)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 2, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (sec-christopher-r-esposito-et-al-undisclosed-control-blocks-2018) by email

In 2018, the Securities and Exchange Commission published a release announcing it had obtained judgments against the owner of Lionshare Ventures and a co-defendant for concealing control of a publicly traded company and selling its shares. This library classifies the conduct as undisclosed control blocks and unregistered distributions. The release records a civil penalty of $167,500, disgorgement of $22,500.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

$168k

Disgorgement

$22.5k

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

$190k

Alleged gain

—

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on April 30, 2018 as release LR-24123. The respondents named are Christopher R. Esposito and Rene Galizio (2 individuals, 0 entities). The action was brought in the U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts.

The release reports a default judgment against the incubator's owner (a $160,000 penalty and $1,107,413 in disgorgement and interest, joint with the company) and a consent judgment against a co-defendant (disgorgement of $22,500 and a $7,500 penalty). The penalty figure recorded is the sum of the two penalties; the owner's disgorgement is combined with interest and with the company's and is not recorded separately. The conduct is concealed control and sale of Cannabiz Mobile stock, so the paid-promotion tag has been replaced with undisclosed control blocks and unregistered distributions.

This library tags the matter as undisclosed control blocks and unregistered distributions, based on the conduct the regulator describes. Each tag links to a page explaining how that technique works, what statute it engages, and what penalties comparable actions have attracted. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

The conduct is recorded against equities.

The relief recorded in our data is a civil penalty of $167,500, disgorgement of $22,500. Penalty and disgorgement are distinct: disgorgement returns the gain, while the penalty is punitive. We store them separately so that aggregate figures across the library are not double-counted.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with 2 techniques in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Undisclosed control blocks — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
• Unregistered distributions — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2018-04-30 Litigation release published

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• SEC litigation release

The linked release is a work of the United States government and is not subject to copyright. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Same matter

The library links these 2 records because they appear to concern one matter: the same lead defendant, an overlapping technique tag and close filing dates, or a shared court docket or a release that cites the other. Records are listed by date filed.

This grouping is the library's, made by matching names, techniques, dates and citations when the site is built. It is not the regulator's or a court's determination that the records are one case, and it errs towards missing a link rather than making a false one.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.