The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is making slow progress in its action targeting fraudulent cryptocurrency scheme PlexCorps, aka PlexCoin, as well as the individuals associated with it.
On February 17, 2022, the SEC submitted a motion at the New York Eastern District Court requesting the approval of a transfer of funds to the Receiver in a related case in Quebec, Canada.
The SEC seeks to transfer approximately $1.4 million in disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and civil penalties collected on the final judgment in this action, plus any additional collections (“PlexCorps Fair Fund”) to the Receiver appointed in the related action pending in Superior Court in Quebec, Canada for distribution to harmed investors.
The regulator says it believes transferring the PlexCorps Fair Fund to the Receiver to be in the best interests of harmed investors. Let’s recall that, in November 20, 2019, the SEC sent notice to more than 91,000 possible harmed investors of its intent to propose to the Court that the PlexCorps Fair Fund be sent to the Receiver for distribution.
Let’s recall that, on December 1, 2017, the SEC filed a Complaint against PlexCorps, Dominic LaCroix, and Sabrina Paradis-Royer, and at the same time, sought and obtained temporary restraining orders, to stop the Defendants’ dissemination of a series of material false and misleading statements and the misappropriation of investor assets in connection with the illegal offering for unregistered securities known as PlexCoins through the PlexCoin Initial Coin Offering (ICO).
In its complaint, the SEC alleged that PlexCorps, and its proprietors Lacroix and Paradis-Royer, fraudulently raised millions of dollars in virtual and fiat currency from the unregistered sales of PlexCoin based on a series of false and misleading statements to potential and actual investors, including misrepresentations about the size and scale of PlexCorps’ operations, the use of funds raised in the PlexCoin ICO, and the amount of funds raised in the PlexCoin ICO.
The SEC charged the defendants with violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.