SEC v. Peter Emrich and others (2011)
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.
In December 2011 an SEC administrative law judge barred James Frankfurth, one of five respondents, after his 2005 guilty plea to conspiracy to commit securities fraud.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | 3-14509 |
| Date filed | 2011-12-30 |
| Date resolved | 2011-12-30 |
| Court | SEC administrative law judge |
| Status | judgment |
| Asset class | bonds, equities |
| Criminal parallel | Yes: sentenced (James Frankfurth (one of five respondents); five years' probation including six months' home detention), U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, 2010-06-21 |
| Bars imposed | registration bar |
| Defendants | Peter Emrich ; Alberto Ferreiras ; James Frankfurth ; Frank Rossi ; Dana Valensky |
| Cited as charged or alleged | 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy) |
| Techniques |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
On December 30, 2011 an SEC administrative law judge issued an initial decision as to James Frankfurth, one of five respondents named in the proceeding, barring him from associating with any broker, dealer, investment adviser, municipal securities dealer or transfer agent and from penny stock offerings. The order rests on his May 2005 guilty plea to conspiracy to commit securities fraud and the criminal judgment against him, concerning a fraudulent and unregistered offering of Out of the Black Partners, LLC securities that raised about $3.1 million from ninety-five investors in 1999 to 2001. The record previously showed this as dismissed and listed the last respondent as 'and Dana Valensky'.
The sanction rests on a fraud conviction, not a Section 5 finding, so the unregistered distributions tag has been removed.
This library does not assign a technique tag to the matter, because no technique page in the current taxonomy describes the conduct the document records.
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.
Timeline
- 2011-12-30 Initial decision
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.