SEC v. Neil S. Chandran; Garry J. Davidson; Michael T. Glaspie; Linda C. Knott; Amy S. Mossel; AEO Publishing Inc., et al., No. 4:23-cv-10017, Eastern District of Michigan (July 8, 2024) — Complaint

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

UNITED STATES SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,
          Case No. 2:23-cv  -10017
   Plaintiff,
             Hon.
   v.
        JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
NEIL S. CHANDRAN,
GARRY J. DAVIDSON,
MICHAEL T. GLASPIE,
LINDA C. KNOTT,
AMY S. MOSSEL,
AEO PUBLISHING INC.,
BANNER CO-OP, INC.,  and
BANNERSGO, LLC,

   Defendants.
_____________________________________/

COMPLAINT
 Plaintiff, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”),
alleges as follows:
SUMMARY OF ACTION
1. This case concerns a brazen and far-reaching unregistered offering
fraud conducted between at least 2018 and 2022 by Defendants Neil Chandran,
Garry Davidson, Michael Glaspie, Linda Knott, Amy Mossel, Banner Co-Op, Inc.

(“Banner Co-Op”), BannersGo, LLC (“BannersGo”), and AEO Publishing Inc.
(“AEO Publishing”).
2. Chandran, a recidivist securities law violator and convicted felon,
claimed to own a unique blockchain technology that was on the verge of being sold
for trillions of dollars to a group of reputable billionaire buyers (“CoinDeal”).
Chandran further claimed his business required interim financial support until the
sale transaction closed.  Together with and through other named Defendants,
Chandran targeted mostly unsophisticated investors with false and misleading
promises and representations that investments in CoinDeal would soon yield
extremely high returns from the imminent sale of his business.  Ultimately, there
was no sale, and no distribution of proceeds, because CoinDeal was a sham.
3. Given his criminal record, Chandran incentivized others such as
Davidson (an investor in a prior Chandran scheme) and Glaspie (recruited by
Davidson) to help raise funds for CoinDeal by soliciting public investment.
4. Glaspie, an online promoter, raised large sums for CoinDeal from tens
of thousands of investors in multiple states and countries.  As part of his
promotional campaign, Glaspie knowingly or recklessly disseminated false
information about CoinDeal that he received from Chandran via Davidson,
including information concerning the supposed value and timeline of the sale
transaction, as well as the purported involvement of prominent business people,

financial institutions and governmental departments or agencies.  Glaspie regularly
communicated such false information to investors through near-daily written
updates and weekly teleconferences, in which Davidson occasionally participated.
5. Glaspie made additional misrepresentations and engaged in other
fraudulent conduct, including by:  creating and publicizing astronomical payout
scales that ranged from multi-million dollar returns for investments of $1,000 or
less, to returns in excess of $50 billion for investments of $100,000; offering
referral bonuses to entice investors to recruit others to participate in CoinDeal; and
personally guaranteeing to refund investors with 7% interest should CoinDeal not
come to fruition.
6. Knott, who invested in CoinDeal through Glaspie and engaged in her
own promotional activity, similarly fabricated payout scales with conspicuous rates
of return and knowingly or recklessly disseminated false information about
CoinDeal when soliciting prospective investors.
7. Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie (with substantial assistance from his
wife, Mossel, and her business entity, AEO Publishing) and Knott raised over $45
million through the fraudulent CoinDeal offering.  Investor funds typically flowed
into financial accounts held by Glaspie’s entities, Banner Co-Op and BannersGo,
were then transferred to accounts controlled by Davidson, and ultimately routed to
accounts controlled by Chandran.  Knott pooled investor funds she raised, which

totaled at least $749,000, before periodically transferring amounts to Glaspie.
Neither Knott, Glaspie nor Davidson transferred all CoinDeal investor funds
upstream – rather, each diverted investor funds for personal use along the way.
8. Collectively, Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, and Knott
misappropriated tens of millions of dollars of investor funds for personal use and
diverted funds to individuals and entities unrelated to CoinDeal, including Mossel
and AEO Publishing.
9. As a result of their conduct, Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott,
Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly committed
securities fraud and offered and sold unregistered securities.  Mossel and AEO
Publishing aided and abetted Glaspie’s violations.
10. Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo
violated Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities
Act”) [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a), 77e(c), and 77q(a)] and Section 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5
thereunder [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5].
11. Pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77o(b )]
and Section 20(e) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(e)], Davidson, Glaspie,
Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo aided and abetted Chandran’s violations of
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.

12. Pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Act and Section 20(e) of
the Exchange Act, AEO Publishing and Mossel aided and abetted Glaspie’s
violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b)
of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.
13. The SEC brings this lawsuit to prevent further harm to investors and
to seek disgorgement, civil penalties, officer and director bars, permanent
injunctions, and conduct-based injunctions stemming from the Defendants’
wrongdoing.
14. Unless the Defendants are permanently restrained and enjoined, they
will continue to engage in the acts, practices, and courses of business set forth in
this Complaint and in acts, practices, and courses of business of similar type and
object.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
15. The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Sections 20(b)
and 22(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77t(b) and 77v(a)],   and Sections
21(d) and 27(a) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§78u(d) and 78aa(a)].
16. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to Section 22(a) of the
Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77v(a)] and Section 27(a) of the Exchange Act [15
U.S.C. § 78aa(a)], because many of the acts, transactions and courses of business

constituting the violations alleged in this Complaint occurred within the
jurisdiction of this district.
17. In connection with the conduct alleged in this Complaint, the
Defendants,  directly and indirectly,  have made use of the mails and/or means or
instrumentalities of transportation or communication in interstate commerce.
DEFENDANTS
18. Neil S. Chandran,  age 51, is currently imprisoned in Nebraska while
awaiting trial.  Chandran resided in California and Nevada during the relevant time
period.  Chandran managed at least four entities under the umbrella name Virse:
ViMarket, Inc., ViDelivery, Inc., Studio Vi, Inc., and Free Vi Lab (collectively, the
“Chandran Entities”).  In 2006, California’s Department of Corporations ordered
Chandran to desist and refrain from offering or selling securities in California.  In
2015, the Alberta Securities Commission sanctioned Chandran and his company
for engaging in unregistered trading and illegal securities offerings and fined him
$460,000 CAD.  In 2016, the Ontario Securities Commission entered a reciprocal
order against Chandran, banning him from trading in securities and soliciting
investors to trade in securities.  In 2018, Chandran pled guilty to grand larceny and
securities fraud in the state of New York and was ordered to pay $2,868,000. In
June 2022, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) indicted Chandran for wire fraud
and money laundering in connection with the CoinDeal scheme and obtained a

court-ordered freeze of his assets. Chandran does not hold any securities licenses
and has never registered with the SEC.
19. Garry J. Davidson, age 68, resides in Henderson, Nevada.  Davidson
previously invested in another of Chandran’s purported business ventures and
facilitated investments and payments in connection with CoinDeal and the
Chandran Entities.  In June 2022, the Alabama Securities Commission (“ASC”)
ordered Davidson to cease and desist from offering or selling securities in Alabama
due to his involvement with CoinDeal. Davidson does not hold any securities
licenses and has never registered with the SEC.
20. Michael T. Glaspie, age 71, resides in Palm City, Florida.  Glaspie
controls BannersGo, LLC and Banner Co-Op, Inc. (collectively, the “Glaspie
Entities”).  In January 2020, Michigan’s Department of Licensing and Regulatory
Affairs (“LARA”) ordered Glaspie to cease and desist from offering or selling
unregistered securities in Michigan due to his involvement with CoinDeal.  In June
2020, Glaspie agreed to cease and desist and pay a $15,000 fine; however, in
October 2021, the Michigan Department of Attorney General obtained an
injunction against Glaspie due to his ongoing violations of the June 2020 cease-
and-desist order.  More recently, in June 2022, the ASC ordered Glaspie to cease
and desist from offering or selling securities in Alabama due to his involvement

with CoinDeal.  Glaspie does not hold any securities licenses and has never
registered with the SEC.
21. Linda C. Knott, age 57, resides in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  Knott
acted as a downstream promoter for CoinDeal and raised investor funds through
her d/b/a entity, Together We Profit.  In April 2022, LARA ordered Knott to cease
and desist from offering or selling unregistered securities in Michigan due to her
involvement with CoinDeal.  In August 2022, Knott agreed to cease and desist and
pay a $10,000 fine.  Knott does not hold any securities licenses and has never
registered with the SEC.
22. Amy Mossel, age 55, resides in Palm City, Florida.  Mossel is married
to Glaspie.  Mossel controls AEO Publishing Inc.  Mossel assisted Glaspie in
disseminating information to the public regarding CoinDeal and collecting investor
funds.  Mossel does not hold any securities licenses and has never registered with
the SEC.
23. AEO Publishing is a Delaware corporation formed in March 2000
with its principal place of business in Palm City, Florida.  Mossel is the sole officer
and director of AEO Publishing, an online publishing company.  Mossel used AEO
Publishing to collect investor funds.  AEO Publishing has never registered with the
SEC.

24. Banner Co-Op is a Delaware corporation formed in August 1998
with its principal place of business in Highland, Michigan.  Glaspie is the president
of Banner Co-Op, an internet services company.  In January 2020, LARA ordered
Banner Co-Op to cease and desist from offering or selling unregistered securities
in Michigan due to its involvement with CoinDeal.  In June 2020, Banner Co-Op
agreed to cease and desist and pay a $15,000 fine; however, in October 2021, the
Michigan Department of Attorney General obtained an injunction against Banner
Co-Op due to its ongoing violations of the June 2020 cease and desist order.  More
recently, in June 2022, the ASC ordered Banner Co-Op to cease and desist from
offering or selling securities in Alabama due to its involvement with CoinDeal.
Banner Co-Op has never registered with the SEC.
25. BannersGo is a Michigan limited liability company formed in
December 2019 with its principal place of business in Highland, Michigan.
Glaspie organized BannersGo as an internet services company.  BannersGo has
never registered with the SEC.
FACTS
Chandran Created the “CoinDeal” Scheme
26. From at least 2018, Chandran repeatedly touted an investment
opportunity that supposedly revolved around valuable blockchain technology he
was far along in the process of selling to a group of wealthy buyers at a trillion-

dollar valuation. Chandran sought short-term funding for business operating
expenses during the completion of the purported sale process and promised
investors substantial returns once the sale closed. This investment opportunity later
became widely known to investors as “CoinDeal.”
27. In reality, CoinDeal was merely the most recent iteration of
Chandran’s prior fraudulent schemes.  No such buyer group existed, there was no
impending sale, and Chandran was incapable of producing the astronomical returns
he promised.
28. Given the public record of his legal troubles, Chandran sought to
utilize others to solicit investors on his behalf.  Chandran turned to Davidson, an
investor in one of his prior schemes who remained in contact with Chandran in
hopes of recouping his prior investment.  Davidson agreed to find others to invest,
financially motivated by Chandran’s offer to pay him increased returns based on
the amount he could raise.
Davidson Recruited Glaspie and Served as a Go-Between for Chandran
29. Davidson sought avenues for fundraising and identified Glaspie
through an internet search.  In or around mid-2018, Davidson contacted Glaspie,
based on Glaspie’s substantial online presence and reputed success with internet
multi-level marketing programs.

30. Davidson presented the CoinDeal opportunity to Glaspie.  Davidson
described it as debt financing for a company involved with cryptocurrency and
artificial intelligence that was pending sale.  Davidson made Glaspie aware of
Chandran’s involvement and offered Glaspie substantial returns.
31. Davidson and Glaspie had never met or spoken prior to this initial
contact by Davidson.  Nonetheless, Glaspie decided to invest and solicit others to
invest in CoinDeal without conducting any independent research or other due
diligence on Chandran, Davidson, or CoinDeal.
32. Specifically, Davidson and Glaspie agreed to solicit investments in
CoinDeal from Glaspie’s expansive network of internet marketing contacts and to
transfer monies raised from investors to Chandran and/or the Chandran Entities.
33. From 2018 to 2022, Davidson relayed information that he received
from Chandran about CoinDeal to Glaspie to facilitate Glaspie’s solicitation
efforts.
34. Chandran regularly used encrypted email, text messages, and phone
calls to share with Davidson false and misleading information concerning
CoinDeal.  Chandran typically provided status updates on the supposed deal,
including but not limited to:  the involvement of foreign central banks and the
United States Department of Homeland Security; the latest board meetings of the
consortium of wealthy buyers; the role of certain political figures; and the causes

of “temporary” delays to the sale closing.  These updates were designed to lull
investors and induce them to continue investing in CoinDeal.
35. To distribute information received from Chandran via encrypted
message, Davidson typically would copy and paste the latest supposed update
regarding CoinDeal to an unencrypted email message to Glaspie.
36. Glaspie would then include the information received from Davidson
in written and/or oral communications with investors and potential investors, such
as   “CoinDeal Updates”   that were made available online and via email, and
discussed during teleconferences.
37. For example, Chandran ([email protected]) sent an
encrypted email to Davidson ([email protected]) on February 28, 2019, with the
subject line: “Elite Sponsors : Statement Registration Requires Sign Off in SF ;
Traveling to Obtain for Close of Business PST.”

38. On the same day, February 28, 2019, Davidson sent Glaspie an
unencrypted email regarding an “update” with the information he had copied from
Chandran’s email.  As shown below, the email included information regarding the
same subject of Chandran’s previous email, including travel to San Francisco for
“statement registration”:

39. The very next day, in a March 1, 2019 “CoinDeal Update”
communication, Glaspie shared with investors the same information he had
received from Davidson the day before concerning “statement registration” in San
Francisco:

40. The above-described pattern of communication between Chandran
and Davidson, followed by communication between Davidson and Glaspie,
followed by a CoinDeal investor update from Glapsie to investors, occurred
regularly in the course of the CoinDeal offering.
Chandran, Davidson,  and Glaspie Offered CoinDeal to Investors   Through
Glaspie’s Network
41. In or around January 2019, Glaspie began promoting the CoinDeal
opportunity during weekly teleconferences   that included over 100,000 invitees
from his network of contacts.  Glaspie explained that an unnamed Canadian
resident had a very valuable (but anonymous) artificial intelligence and
cryptocurrency company that was preparing for an imminent sale to a group of
billionaire buyers.  Glaspie further explained that the Canadian resident was unable
to obtain conventional financing due to prior legal issues.  Glaspie did not reveal
that this unnamed individual was Chandran, and he also failed to disclose that this
individual had a criminal history in the United States.
42. Davidson participated in certain of these weekly teleconferences
alongside Glaspie.  Glaspie explained to investors that Davidson brought the
opportunity to Glaspie and described him as a representative of CoinDeal.  For
example, during teleconferences held on March 7, 2020, and August 5, 2020,
Glaspie referred to Davidson as a CoinDeal trustee.

43. In or around January 2019, Glaspie also began making online posts
and disseminating emails to solicit CoinDeal investments.  The online posts and
emails included materially false and misleading updates on CoinDeal based on
information Glaspie received from Chandran via Davidson and a payout scale that
promised investors outsized returns based on a given investment amount.
44. To attract prospective investors, Glaspie created his own payout scale
using Chandran’s astronomical valuations of CoinDeal.    Glaspie utilized a tiered
payout scale by offering a higher return for larger investment amounts.  As set
forth below, Glaspie offered increasingly extravagant returns that grew from 10
times the investment amount in his updates from early 2019 to 500,000 times the
investment amount in updates from late 2021.
To Lure Investors, CoinDeal’s Premise Was Little Ventured, Much Gained
45. In promoting CoinDeal, Glaspie anticipated that large numbers of
investors would jump at the opportunity to obtain a life-changing financial reward,
particularly if it did not require much outlay of capital.  Thus, despite having no
legitimate basis for doing so, Glaspie published online dozens of different high
rates of return that continued to grow over time to encourage investment in
CoinDeal, even when the supposedly imminent transaction had yet to occur.
Based on these promised payouts, investors were misled to expect millions and
potentially billions in return for a comparatively small, short-term investment.

46. For example, on June 12, 2019, Glaspie published online a promise to
pay returns of 20-to -1  (2000%) on investments in CoinDeal:

47. On August 28, 2020, Glaspie published online CoinDeal payout terms
ranging from $750,000 for a mere $250 investment to as high as $1 billion for a
$100,000 investment:

48. On September 9, 2020 (less than two weeks later), Glaspie published
online increased CoinDeal payout terms and offered even higher payouts for higher
investment amounts, including over $2 billion for a $100,000 investment:

49. The following month, on October 19, 2020, Glaspie again published
online increased CoinDeal payout terms, ranging from at least $1.5 million for a
mere $250 investment to over $4 billion for a $100,000 investment:

50. On June 25, 2021, Glaspie published online CoinDeal payout terms
that were far more extravagant, ranging from at least $12.5 million for a $500
investment to as high as $56.25 billion, plus a high-end luxury automobile, for a
$100,000 investment:

51. By promising ever-escalating high rates of return, based on false
valuation information from Chandran (via Davidson), Glaspie was able to create
and maintain investor interest in CoinDeal, even when the supposed deal failed to
close on the short-term time horizons advertised to investors.
Chandran, Davidson,  and Glaspie Repeatedly Fabricated Excuses for Why
CoinDeal’s Closing Was Delayed
52. During the CoinDeal offering, Chandran, Davidson,  and Glaspie
repeatedly represented that CoinDeal was on the cusp of closing, purposefully
misleading current and prospective investors to believe they could receive a large
payout in a matter of days or weeks, not months or years.

53. For example, on March 21, 2019, Glaspie stated in his online update
that he expected CoinDeal to close later that day.
54. On May 8, 2019, Glaspie stated in his online update that he expected
CoinDeal to close the following day.
55. On October 2, 2019, Glaspie stated in his online update that CoinDeal
was expected to close that night.
56. On April 11, 2020, Glaspie stated in his online update that CoinDeal
would be closing within three days.
57. On January 11, 2021, Glaspie stated in his online update that
CoinDeal would be closing by January 13, 2021.
58. Without disclosing his full name, Chandran participated in at least one
teleconference hosted by Glaspie on October 24, 2020, and told investors that
CoinDeal’s closing was only a week or two away.
59. CoinDeal, however, never existed and thus, by design, the deal never
closed.  Glaspie, based on information from Chandran (via Davidson), provided a
continuous string of excuses for why closing did not occur.  For example, on
February 22, 2019, Glaspie falsely claimed in an online post that CoinDeal’s
closing had been delayed due to a vendor company declaring bankruptcy:

60. On April 16, 2019, Glaspie falsely claimed in an online post that
closing of CoinDeal had been delayed because a South Korean bank involved in
the deal required in -person signatures in Hawaii:

61. On May 7, 2019, Glaspie falsely claimed in an online post that
CoinDeal’s closing was delayed because an engineer familiar with the company
systems was sick:

62. On July 24, 2019, Glaspie falsely claimed in an online post that
closing was somehow delayed due to an issue involving the number of smart
phones being supplied by a vendor:

63. During the CoinDeal offering, Glaspie provided other, similarly false
and misleading explanations, based on information from Chandran (via Davidson),

for why the closing of CoinDeal was delayed but remained imminent, in order to
lull investors and induce them to continue investing in CoinDeal.
Chandran, Davidson,  and Glaspie Provided Investors With Additional False
Information Regarding CoinDeal
64. Throughout the relevant time period, prospective investors were
constantly flooded with opportunities to invest in CoinDeal.  Glaspie continued
hosting weekly teleconferences and disseminating written updates on a near-daily
basis (and occasionally multiple times in one day) to promote CoinDeal and solicit
funds until 2022.
65. In addition to false statements about the expected profitability of the
CoinDeal transaction, related false promises of outsized investment returns, and
myriad false excuses for why CoinDeal had not yet closed, Glaspie and Davidson
directly made various other material misrepresentations to investors and
prospective investors.
66. For example, based on information from Chandran, Davidson falsely
stated, during a teleconference on March 6, 2021, that Billionaire 1 and Billionaire
2 were each under consideration as the potential CEO for the CoinDeal business
enterprise. Billionaire 1 is the founder and executive chairman of a large online
retailing company.  Billionaire 2 is    the CEO of an electric car company.  During
the same teleconference, Davidson falsely stated that CoinDeal had a market
capitalization of $50 trillion.

67. Based on information from Chandran (via Davidson), Glaspie
similarly falsely stated in his June 7, 2021 online update that Billionaire 1 was a
member of the billionaire buyers’ group that planned to purchase one or more
Chandran Entities:

68. Based on information from Chandran (via Davidson), Glaspie falsely
stated during a February 20, 2021 teleconference that Billionaire 2 was also a
member of the buyers’ group that planned to purchase one or more Chandran
Entities.
69. Glaspie also falsely claimed that he was under a strict non-disclosure
agreement, which prevented him from disclosing the name of the seller, the names
of the buyers, and the name of the company.  In reality, this was merely another
ruse to avoid scrutiny, as no such non-disclosure agreement existed.

70. Glaspie went so far as to falsely deny Chandran’s involvement.  When
investors asked Glaspie whether Chandran was the seller behind CoinDeal, Glaspie
denied Chandran’s role in the scheme.
71. For example, on or about August 19, 2021, a prospective CoinDeal
investor shared a link containing information about Chandran’s 2018 criminal
charges and asked Glaspie to “confirm that Neil Chandran is NOT the seller of this
transaction.”  In response, Glaspie denied that Chandran was involved, admonished
the individual for “spreading rumors,” and further stated: “Please make this the last
email on this topic [as] I just don[’]t have time for this disrupting email.”
72. By way of further example, on or about September 3, 2021, Glaspie
again denied Chandran’s involvement in CoinDeal to a prospective investor.  On
this occasion, the concerned individual told Glaspie: “I have been doing some
digging around the internet. Some people say that ‘Neil’ the owner, is actually
convicted fraudster Neil Chandran. Please tell me that’s not true.”  The individual
further described finding “red flags” when searching Chandran’s name on the
internet.  In response, Glaspie stated: “[W]here these rumors start is a mystery to
me. The owner is NOT the man u think he is.”
73. Glaspie also lured investors through false guarantees to investors that
he would repay all amounts invested in CoinDeal with 7% interest within three

years if the CoinDeal sale transaction did not occur.  In reality, Glaspie did not
have the financial resources to make any such guarantee.
74. For instance, on November 16, 2020, Glaspie published online in a
written update his guarantee to pay 7% interest on all amounts invested in
CoinDeal.

75. To entice further investment, Glaspie offered referral bonuses for
investors who raised additional funds.
76. For example, Glaspie published online a 25% referral bonus offer in
his October 19, 2020 update:

77. Similarly, on November 16, 2020, Glaspie published online in a
written update his offer of a 25% referral bonus for bringing new investors to
CoinDeal:

CoinDeal Investor Funds Flowed Through the Glaspie Entities to Davidson,
Chandran, and the Chandran Entities

78. At Glaspie’s direction, investors participated in the CoinDeal offering
through the Glaspie Entities.
79. Glaspie instructed investors to send payments for CoinDeal
investments to bank accounts in the name of his entities, Banner Co-Op and
BannersGo, which he promised to investors he would pass along to Davidson for
CoinDeal.
80. The Glaspie Entities received CoinDeal investor funds at certain bank
institutions, some of which were located in Michigan.  Investors’ funds were
commingled and transferred to other accounts controlled by Glaspie and his wife,
Mossel, including accounts in the name of Mossel’s company, AEO Publishing.
81. At Davidson’s instruction, Glaspie and/or Mossel caused the transfer
of investor funds,  held in accounts in the name of the Glaspie Entities and AEO
Publishing, to  specified bank accounts controlled by Davidson.
82. At Chandran’s direction, Davidson transferred the funds upstream to
Chandran, the Chandran Entities, and Chandran’s associates.
83. Certain funds were also transferred directly from the Glaspie Entities
to Chandran and the Chandran Entities following the closure of certain of
Davidson’s bank accounts.

84. From 2019 to 2022, Glaspie, through the Glaspie Entities, raised over
$45 million, as well additional amounts via crypto assets, from thousands of
CoinDeal investors from multiple states and countries.
Defendants Misappropriated Investor Funds
85. Defendants failed to disclose to investors that funds invested in
CoinDeal would be used for purposes unrelated to CoinDeal.
86. Chandran received at least $37 million in investor funds for CoinDeal.
Chandran and the Chandran Entities misappropriated investors’ funds to purchase,
among other items, a fleet of luxury vehicles, various real estate properties in
California and Nevada, and a boat.
87. The Glaspie Entities were controlled by Glaspie, and, unbeknownst to
investors, he determined how investor funds would be used upon receipt, including
for his own personal use.  Glaspie, through the Glaspie Entities, misappropriated
approximately $ 5.9 million or more by transferring investor funds to other
accounts that he and Mossel controlled that were   unrelated to CoinDeal and by
directly paying his and Mossel’s personal expenses.  Glaspie used investors’ funds
to contribute over $100,000 to an insurance policy for his son and to contribute
$8  00,000 to an annuity policy in Mossel’s name.  Glaspie also used investor funds
to cover operating expenses for the Glaspie Entities and transferred millions to his
associates to pay salaries and for other business ventures.

88. Davidson misappropriated at least $3   million of investors’ funds.
Among other misuse of investor funds, Davidson purchased a $150,000 mobile
home and used investor funds for personal living expenses.
Mossel and AEO Publishing Substantially Assisted the CoinDeal Scheme
89. Mossel was aware of Glaspie’s efforts to raise funds for CoinDeal and
substantially assisted him in furthering the scheme.
90. Glaspie typically dictated his investor updates regarding CoinDeal to
Mossel who would then post the updates online and circulate them via email.
Mossel knew, recklessly disregarded, should have known, or consciously avoided
knowing that the information and promises contained in Glaspie’s online updates
were false and misleading.
91. Mossel served as a bookkeeper for the Glaspie Entities.  Mossel
issued   invoices to CoinDeal investors on behalf of the Glaspie Entities and
collected and commingled investor funds in bank accounts held in the name of
Banner Co-Op, BannersGo, and her own company, AEO Publishing.
92. In her role as bookkeeper, Mossel regularly communicated with
investors regarding the amount of their investments   and potential payouts.
93. Mossel also transferred investor funds to Davidson and the Chandran
Entities.

94. Glaspie and Mossel diverted at least $1 million of investors’ funds to
Mossel and AEO Publishing.
Knott Also Engaged in the CoinDeal Offering Fraud Through Her Own
Promotional Activities
95. Glaspie’s widespread marketing of CoinDeal and his offer of referral
bonuses attracted promoters who established their own investor groups.  These
promoters would pool investor funds to reach higher levels on Glaspie’s tiered
payout scale and obtain larger referral bonuses.  One such promoter was Linda
Knott.
96. In February 2021, Knott learned of CoinDeal through one of Glaspie’s
teleconferences and decided to invest $1,000.  Knott did not know of Glaspie
before listening to the teleconference, and Knott did not conduct any independent
research on Glaspie or CoinDeal before investing.
97. After learning of the aforementioned payout scale and referral
bonuses promised by Glaspie, Knott started collecting funds for CoinDeal through
an investor group called Together We Profit.
98. Together We Profit was a loose arrangement of individuals interested
in participating in CoinDeal.  Knott instructed members to send funds to accounts
controlled by Knott, which she represented would be transferred to Glaspie for
investing in CoinDeal.  During the relevant time period, Together We Profit grew
to approximately 10,000 members from multiple states and countries.

99. Similar to Glaspie, Knott disseminated email updates and hosted
teleconferences concerning CoinDeal.
100. In written updates and during teleconferences with current and
potential investors, Knott repeated misrepresentations made in Glaspie’s written
CoinDeal updates and teleconferences, including misrepresentations regarding the
involvement of prominent billionaire buyers.
101. Knott also repeated Glaspie’s baseless guarantee that CoinDeal
investors would receive a full refund with 7% interest if the sale did not occur.
102. Knott facilitated investment by lowering the barrier to entry for
CoinDeal by allowing prospective investors to participate for as little as $27, which
was lower than the amounts permitted by Glaspie.
103. Knott created and disseminated her own payout scale to attract
investors, including in emails and online posts in October and November 2021.
Knott’s advertised payout scale grew over time from payouts of $500,000 for each
$27 investment, to  payouts of $14 million for each $27 investment.
104. During 2021, Knott raised at least $749,000 in fiat currency and
additional amounts in crypto currency from thousands of investors from multiple
states, including Michigan, and multiple countries.

105. While Knott assured investors she would transmit all of their funds to
CoinDeal, that was false.  She enriched herself by misappropriating approximately
$79,000 or more for personal use and purposes unrelated to CoinDeal.
Defendants Continued the Fraudulent CoinDeal Offering Even After State
Authorities Ordered Them to Cease and Desist
106. In January 2020, LARA ordered Glaspie and Banner Co-Op to cease
and desist from offering or selling unregistered securities in Michigan in
connection with CoinDeal.  In June 2020, Glaspie settled by agreeing to cease and
desist and paying a $15,000 fine.
107. Nevertheless, Glaspie continued offering and selling securities to
investors in Michigan for CoinDeal.
108. In October 2021, the Michigan Department of Attorney General
obtained an injunction against Glaspie and Banner Co-Op for their failure to abide
by the June 2020 consent order.  The judgment prohibited Glaspie and Banner Co-
Op from continuing to solicit funds from and offering investment opportunities to
Michigan residents.
109. On June 1, 2022, the Alabama Securities Commission ordered
Glaspie, Davidson, and Banner Co-Op to cease and desist from offering or selling
securities in Alabama.
110. Despite these actions by state regulatory authorities, Glaspie and
Davidson continued to accept investor funds.

111. In 2021, Knott became aware of LARA’s cease-and-desist order and
received warnings from a Glaspie associate about the legal ramifications of
accepting funds from Michigan investors. Nonetheless, Knott created a
workaround.
112. In September 2021, Knott addressed prospective Michigan investors
and informed them that she, in lieu of Glaspie, would accept their funds for a
higher fee ($30) through a separate company she had created:

113. In April 2022, LARA ordered Knott d/b/a Together We Profit to cease
and desist from offering or selling unregistered securities in Michigan.  In August
2022, Knott stipulated to a cease-and-desist order and a $10,000 fine.
The CoinDeal Scheme Collapses
114. In June 2022, the CoinDeal scheme largely collapsed when the DOJ
indicted Chandran for wire fraud and money laundering violations and froze his
assets. USA v. Chandran, Case No. 22-cr-03077 (D. Neb. 2022).  The indictment
described a scheme to defraud carried out by Chandran, in which he caused others
to solicit funds from investors based on the false and misleading portrayal that their

investments would soon yield extremely high returns upon the purchase of one or
more of his entities by a wealthy buyer group.
115. Even after Chandran’s arrest, Glaspie continued to lull investors with
co  nfounding rationalizations about the purported legitimacy and ongoing viability
of CoinDeal.  For example, on June 30, 2022, Glaspie published online the
following update:

116. On July 15, 2022, Glaspie published online another false and
misleading update:

117. The vast majority of CoinDeal investors have not received the return
of their principal investment amounts, and no investors have received any
promised profits on their investments.
118. Chandran, Glaspie, and Mossel declined to testify during the SEC’s
investigation, invoking their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Unregistered Securities Offerings
119. As set forth above, the Defendants offered and sold CoinDeal
investments and raised over $ 45 million from investors in multiple states and
countries.
120. The Defendants recruited potential investors through teleconferences,
online posts, and email.
121. The Defendants made no efforts to assess potential investors’
sophistication or accreditation status, and unaccredited investors participated in the
CoinDeal offering.  Many investors had no preexisting relationship with the
Defendants.
122. The Defendants represented to CoinDeal investors that they would
pool the money raised from investors and use it to cover operating or per diem
expenses for CoinDeal.
123. CoinDeal investors did not exercise any control or authority over the
operations of CoinDeal.  Chandran exercised ultimate control and authority over

CoinDeal, and investors relied on his purported managerial skills, along with the
efforts of Davidson, Glaspie, and Knott, to provide a return on their investment.
124. The Defendants used interstate commerce when they offered and sold
CoinDeal investments in multiple states and countries by, among other things,
corresponding with potential investors via email and teleconferences and receiving
investor funds via interstate wire transfers.
125. The CoinDeal investments offered and sold by the Defendants were
securities.
126. No registration statement was ever filed with the SEC or has ever
been in effect with respect to any offers and sales of CoinDeal investments.

COUNT I
Violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act
[15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)]
(Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo)

127. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference
as though fully set forth herein.
128. By engaging in the conduct described above, Defendants Chandran,
Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo, in the offer and sale of
securities, by the use of the means and instruments of transportation or
communication in interstate commerce or by use of the mails, directly or
indirectly, (i) employed devices, schemes and artifices to defraud; (ii) obtained
money and property by means of untrue statements of material facts and omissions

to state material facts necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of
the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; and (iii) engaged
in transactions, practices, and courses of business which operated or would operate
as a fraud or deceit upon the purchasers of such securities.
129. Defendants Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and
BannersGo acted intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently, in engaging
in the conduct described above.
130. By engaging in the conduct described above, Defendants Chandran,
Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo violated Section 17(a) of
the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)].
COUNT II
Violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act
and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5
[15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5]
(Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo)
131. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference.
132. By engaging in the conduct described above, Defendants Chandran,
Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo, in connection with the
purchase and sale of securities, by the use of the means and instrumentalities of
interstate commerce and by the use of the mails, directly and indirectly, (i)
employed devices, schemes and artifices to defraud; (ii) made untrue statements of
material fact and omitted to state material facts necessary in order to make the

statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made,
not misleading; and (iii) engaged in acts, practices and courses of business which
operated or would have operated as a fraud and deceit upon purchasers of
securities and upon other persons.
133. Defendants Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and
BannersGo acted intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly, in engaging in the
fraudulent conduct described above.
134. Through the foregoing, Defendants Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie,
Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act
[15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 thereunder [17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5].
COUNT III
Violations of Section 5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act
[15 U.S.C. § 77e(a) and (c)]
(Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo)

135. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference.
136. From in or about 2019   through in or about 2022, Defendants
Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo, directly or
indirectly, as to CoinDeal securities: (a) made use of the means or instruments of
transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to sell
securities through the use or medium of a prospectus or otherwise; or carried
securities or caused such securities to be carried through the mails or in interstate
commerce, by means or instruments of transportation, for the purpose of sale or

delivery after sale; and (b) made use of the means or instruments of transportation
or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to offer to sell or to offer
to buy, through the use or medium of any prospectus or otherwise, securities
without a registration statement having been filed with the SEC or being in effect
as to such securities.
137. No registration statements were filed with the SEC or were in effect in
connection with offers or sales of CoinDeal securities by Defendants Chandran,
Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo, and no exemption from
the registration requirements applied to sales by Defendants   Chandran, Davidson,
Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo.
138. By engaging in the conduct described above, Defendants Chandran,
Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo violated, and unless
restrained and enjoined are reasonably likely to continue to violate Sections 5(a)
and (c) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and (c)].
COUNT IV
Aiding and Abetting Violations of
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act
and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5 (b)
[15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5]
(Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo)

139. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference.
140. As described above, Defendant Chandran, directly or indirectly, in
connection with the purchase and sale of CoinDeal securities, by the use of the

means and instrumentalities of interstate commerce and by the use of the mails,
intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly made untrue statements of material fact and
omitted to state material facts necessary in order to make the statements made, in
the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading.
141. By engaging in the conduct described, Defendant Chandran violated
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5(b)
thereunder [17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5].
142. Defendants Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo
intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly provided substantial assistance to
Defendant Chandran.
143. By reason of the foregoing, Defendants Davidson, Glaspie, Knott,
Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo aided and abetted the violations of Section 10(b) of
the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder by Defendant Chandran and,
pursuant to Section 20(e) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(e)], Defendants
Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo are liable to the same
extent as Defendant Chandran for his violations of Sections 10(b) of the Exchange
Act and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder.

COUNT V
Aiding and Abetting Violations of
Section 17(a) of the Securities Act
[15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)]
(Mossel and AEO Publishing)

144. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference.
145. As described above, Defendant Glaspie,  directly or indirectly, in the
offer and sale of CoinDeal securities by the use of the means and instruments of
transportation or communication in interstate commerce or by use of the mails,
intentionally, knowingly, recklessly,  or negligently, (i) employed devices, schemes
and artifices to defraud; (ii) obtained money and property by means of untrue
statements of material facts and omissions to state material facts necessary in order
to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which they were
made, not misleading; and (iii) engaged in transactions, practices, and courses of
business which operated or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon the purchasers
of such securities.
146. By engaging in the conduct described, Defendant Glaspie violated
Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)].
147.  Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing intentionally, knowingly, or
recklessly provided substantial assistance to Defendant Glaspie.
148. By reason of the foregoing, Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing
aided and abetted the violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, by

Defendant Glaspie and, pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C.
§ 77o(b)], Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing are liable to the same extent as
Defendant Glaspie for his violations   of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act.
COUNT VI
Aiding and Abetting Violations of
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act
and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5
[15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5]
(Mossel and AEO Publishing)
149. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference.
150. As described above, Defendant Glaspie,  directly or indirectly, in
connection with the purchase and sale of CoinDeal securities, by the use of the
means and instrumentalities of interstate commerce and by the use of the mails,
intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly, (i) employed devices, schemes and artifices
to defraud; (ii) made untrue statements of material fact and omitted to state
material facts necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the
circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; and (iii) engaged in
acts, practices and courses of business which operated or would have operated as a
fraud and deceit upon purchasers of securities and upon other persons.
151. By engaging in the conduct described, Defendant Glaspie violated
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 thereunder
[17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5].

152. Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing intentionally, knowingly, or
recklessly provided substantial assistance to Defendant Glaspie.
153. By reason of the foregoing, Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing
aided and abetted the violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule
10b-5 thereunder by Defendant Glaspie and, pursuant to Section 20(e) of the
Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(e)], Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing are
liable to the same extent as Defendant Glaspie for his violations of Sections 10(b)
of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.
COUNT VII
Aiding and Abetting Violations of
Sections 5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act
 [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and (c)]
(Mossel and AEO Publishing)

154. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference.
155. As described above, Defendant Glaspie offered and sold CoinDeal
securities when no registration statements were filed with the SEC or were in effect
in connection with offers or sales of such securities, and no exemption from the
registration requirements applied to Defendant Glaspie’s sales.
156. By engaging in this conduct, Defendant Glaspie violated Sections 5(a)
and (c) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and (c)].

157. Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing intentionally, knowingly, or
recklessly provided substantial assistance to the unregistered offers and sales by
Defendant Glaspie.
158. By reason of the foregoing, Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing
aided and abetted the violations of Section 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act, by
Defendant Glaspie and, pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C.
§ 77o(b)], Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing are liable to the same extent as
Defendant Glaspie for his violations of Sections 5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act.
RELIEF REQUESTED
 THEREFORE, the SEC requests that this Court:
I.
 Permanently enjoin Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees,
attorneys and those persons in active concert or participation with Defendants who
receive actual notice of the order of this Court, by personal service or otherwise,
and each of them from, directly or indirectly, engaging in the transactions, acts,
practices or courses of business described above, or in conduct of similar purport
and object, in violation of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)];
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 thereunder
[17 CFR § 240.10b-5]; and Section 5 of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77e];

II.
 Order Defendants to disgorge all ill-gotten gains and/or unjust enrichment
received directly or indirectly, with pre-judgment interest thereon, as a result of the
alleged violations, pursuant to Exchange Act Sections 21(d)(5) and 21(d)(7) [15
U.S.C. §§ 78u(d)(5) and 78u(d)(7)];
III.
Order Defendants to pay civil penalties pursuant to Section 20(d) of the
Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(d)] and Section 21(d)(3) of the Exchange Act [15
U.S.C. § 78u(d)(3)];
IV.
 Enter an Order, pursuant to Section 21(d)(2) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C.
§ 78u(d)(2)] permanently prohibiting Defendants Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie,
Knott, and Mossel from serving as an officer or director of any issuer that has a
class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 [15 U.S.C. § 78l] of the
Exchange Act or that is required to file reports pursuant to Section 15(d) of the
Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78o(d)];
V.
 Permanently enjoin Defendant Chandran from directly or indirectly,
including, but not limited to, through any entity owned or controlled by Chandran,
participating in the issuance, purchase, offer, or sale of any security; provided,

however, that such injunction shall not prevent Chandran from purchasing or
selling securities for his own personal account; and
VI.
 Grant any other relief this Court deems appropriate.
JURY DEMAND
 Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff
demands that this case be tried to a jury.
Dated:  January 4 , 2023    Respectfully Submitted,

UNITED STATES SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

 s/Michael D. Foster
Michael D. Foster, Illinois Bar No. 6257063
Dante A. Roldán,   Illinois Bar No. 6316972
Caryn Trombino, Illinois Bar No. 6284159
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Chicago Regional Office
175 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 1450
Chicago, Illinois 60604
(312) 353-7390
(312) 353-7398 (facsimile)
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Local Counsel:
DAWN N. ISON
United States Attorney
Eastern District of Michigan

KEVIN ERSKINE (P69120)
Assistant United States Attorney

Eastern District of Michigan
211 W. Fort Street, Ste. 2001
Detroit, MI 48226
Tel: (313) 226-9610
Email: [email protected]

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT  
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

 
         
UNITED STATES SECURITIES     
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,   
          Case No. 2:23-cv-10017 
   Plaintiff,      
             Hon. 
   v.            
        JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 
NEIL S. CHANDRAN,     
GARRY J. DAVIDSON, 
MICHAEL T. GLASPIE,     
LINDA C. KNOTT,         
AMY S. MOSSEL, 
AEO PUBLISHING INC., 
BANNER CO-OP, INC., and      
BANNERSGO, LLC, 
        
   Defendants.         
_____________________________________/ 
 

COMPLAINT 

 Plaintiff, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), 

alleges as follows:   

SUMMARY OF ACTION 

1. This case concerns a brazen and far-reaching unregistered offering 

fraud conducted between at least 2018 and 2022 by Defendants Neil Chandran, 

Garry Davidson, Michael Glaspie, Linda Knott, Amy Mossel, Banner Co-Op, Inc. 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.1   Filed 01/04/23   Page 1 of 46



- 2 - 
 

(“Banner Co-Op”), BannersGo, LLC (“BannersGo”), and AEO Publishing Inc. 

(“AEO Publishing”).   

2. Chandran, a recidivist securities law violator and convicted felon, 

claimed to own a unique blockchain technology that was on the verge of being sold 

for trillions of dollars to a group of reputable billionaire buyers (“CoinDeal”).  

Chandran further claimed his business required interim financial support until the 

sale transaction closed.  Together with and through other named Defendants, 

Chandran targeted mostly unsophisticated investors with false and misleading 

promises and representations that investments in CoinDeal would soon yield 

extremely high returns from the imminent sale of his business.  Ultimately, there 

was no sale, and no distribution of proceeds, because CoinDeal was a sham. 

3. Given his criminal record, Chandran incentivized others such as 

Davidson (an investor in a prior Chandran scheme) and Glaspie (recruited by 

Davidson) to help raise funds for CoinDeal by soliciting public investment.   

4. Glaspie, an online promoter, raised large sums for CoinDeal from tens 

of thousands of investors in multiple states and countries.  As part of his 

promotional campaign, Glaspie knowingly or recklessly disseminated false 

information about CoinDeal that he received from Chandran via Davidson, 

including information concerning the supposed value and timeline of the sale 

transaction, as well as the purported involvement of prominent business people, 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.2   Filed 01/04/23   Page 2 of 46



- 3 - 
 

financial institutions and governmental departments or agencies.  Glaspie regularly 

communicated such false information to investors through near-daily written 

updates and weekly teleconferences, in which Davidson occasionally participated. 

5. Glaspie made additional misrepresentations and engaged in other 

fraudulent conduct, including by:  creating and publicizing astronomical payout 

scales that ranged from multi-million dollar returns for investments of $1,000 or 

less, to returns in excess of $50 billion for investments of $100,000; offering 

referral bonuses to entice investors to recruit others to participate in CoinDeal; and 

personally guaranteeing to refund investors with 7% interest should CoinDeal not 

come to fruition. 

6. Knott, who invested in CoinDeal through Glaspie and engaged in her 

own promotional activity, similarly fabricated payout scales with conspicuous rates 

of return and knowingly or recklessly disseminated false information about 

CoinDeal when soliciting prospective investors.  

7. Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie (with substantial assistance from his 

wife, Mossel, and her business entity, AEO Publishing) and Knott raised over $45 

million through the fraudulent CoinDeal offering.  Investor funds typically flowed 

into financial accounts held by Glaspie’s entities, Banner Co-Op and BannersGo, 

were then transferred to accounts controlled by Davidson, and ultimately routed to 

accounts controlled by Chandran.  Knott pooled investor funds she raised, which 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.3   Filed 01/04/23   Page 3 of 46



- 4 - 
 

totaled at least $749,000, before periodically transferring amounts to Glaspie.  

Neither Knott, Glaspie nor Davidson transferred all CoinDeal investor funds 

upstream – rather, each diverted investor funds for personal use along the way.  

8. Collectively, Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, and Knott 

misappropriated tens of millions of dollars of investor funds for personal use and 

diverted funds to individuals and entities unrelated to CoinDeal, including Mossel 

and AEO Publishing. 

9. As a result of their conduct, Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, 

Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly committed 

securities fraud and offered and sold unregistered securities.  Mossel and AEO 

Publishing aided and abetted Glaspie’s violations. 

10. Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo 

violated Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities 

Act”) [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a), 77e(c), and 77q(a)] and Section 10(b) of the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 

thereunder [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5]. 

11. Pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77o(b)] 

and Section 20(e) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(e)], Davidson, Glaspie, 

Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo aided and abetted Chandran’s violations of 

Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.4   Filed 01/04/23   Page 4 of 46



- 5 - 
 

12. Pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Act and Section 20(e) of 

the Exchange Act, AEO Publishing and Mossel aided and abetted Glaspie’s 

violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) 

of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. 

13. The SEC brings this lawsuit to prevent further harm to investors and 

to seek disgorgement, civil penalties, officer and director bars, permanent 

injunctions, and conduct-based injunctions stemming from the Defendants’ 

wrongdoing. 

14. Unless the Defendants are permanently restrained and enjoined, they 

will continue to engage in the acts, practices, and courses of business set forth in 

this Complaint and in acts, practices, and courses of business of similar type and 

object.  

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

15. The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Sections 20(b) 

and 22(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77t(b) and 77v(a)], and Sections 

21(d) and 27(a) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§78u(d) and 78aa(a)]. 

16. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to Section 22(a) of the 

Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77v(a)] and Section 27(a) of the Exchange Act [15 

U.S.C. § 78aa(a)], because many of the acts, transactions and courses of business 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.5   Filed 01/04/23   Page 5 of 46



- 6 - 
 

constituting the violations alleged in this Complaint occurred within the 

jurisdiction of this district. 

17. In connection with the conduct alleged in this Complaint, the 

Defendants, directly and indirectly, have made use of the mails and/or means or 

instrumentalities of transportation or communication in interstate commerce. 

DEFENDANTS 

18. Neil S. Chandran, age 51, is currently imprisoned in Nebraska while 

awaiting trial.  Chandran resided in California and Nevada during the relevant time 

period.  Chandran managed at least four entities under the umbrella name Virse: 

ViMarket, Inc., ViDelivery, Inc., Studio Vi, Inc., and Free Vi Lab (collectively, the 

“Chandran Entities”).  In 2006, California’s Department of Corporations ordered 

Chandran to desist and refrain from offering or selling securities in California.  In 

2015, the Alberta Securities Commission sanctioned Chandran and his company 

for engaging in unregistered trading and illegal securities offerings and fined him 

$460,000 CAD.  In 2016, the Ontario Securities Commission entered a reciprocal 

order against Chandran, banning him from trading in securities and soliciting 

investors to trade in securities.  In 2018, Chandran pled guilty to grand larceny and 

securities fraud in the state of New York and was ordered to pay $2,868,000. In 

June 2022, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) indicted Chandran for wire fraud 

and money laundering in connection with the CoinDeal scheme and obtained a 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.6   Filed 01/04/23   Page 6 of 46



- 7 - 
 

court-ordered freeze of his assets. Chandran does not hold any securities licenses 

and has never registered with the SEC. 

19. Garry J. Davidson, age 68, resides in Henderson, Nevada.  Davidson 

previously invested in another of Chandran’s purported business ventures and 

facilitated investments and payments in connection with CoinDeal and the 

Chandran Entities.  In June 2022, the Alabama Securities Commission (“ASC”) 

ordered Davidson to cease and desist from offering or selling securities in Alabama 

due to his involvement with CoinDeal. Davidson does not hold any securities 

licenses and has never registered with the SEC.  

20. Michael T. Glaspie, age 71, resides in Palm City, Florida.  Glaspie 

controls BannersGo, LLC and Banner Co-Op, Inc. (collectively, the “Glaspie 

Entities”).  In January 2020, Michigan’s Department of Licensing and Regulatory 

Affairs (“LARA”) ordered Glaspie to cease and desist from offering or selling 

unregistered securities in Michigan due to his involvement with CoinDeal.  In June 

2020, Glaspie agreed to cease and desist and pay a $15,000 fine; however, in 

October 2021, the Michigan Department of Attorney General obtained an 

injunction against Glaspie due to his ongoing violations of the June 2020 cease-

and-desist order.  More recently, in June 2022, the ASC ordered Glaspie to cease 

and desist from offering or selling securities in Alabama due to his involvement 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.7   Filed 01/04/23   Page 7 of 46



- 8 - 
 

with CoinDeal.  Glaspie does not hold any securities licenses and has never 

registered with the SEC.  

21. Linda C. Knott, age 57, resides in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  Knott 

acted as a downstream promoter for CoinDeal and raised investor funds through 

her d/b/a entity, Together We Profit.  In April 2022, LARA ordered Knott to cease 

and desist from offering or selling unregistered securities in Michigan due to her 

involvement with CoinDeal.  In August 2022, Knott agreed to cease and desist and 

pay a $10,000 fine.  Knott does not hold any securities licenses and has never 

registered with the SEC.  

22. Amy Mossel, age 55, resides in Palm City, Florida.  Mossel is married 

to Glaspie.  Mossel controls AEO Publishing Inc.  Mossel assisted Glaspie in 

disseminating information to the public regarding CoinDeal and collecting investor 

funds.  Mossel does not hold any securities licenses and has never registered with 

the SEC.  

23. AEO Publishing is a Delaware corporation formed in March 2000 

with its principal place of business in Palm City, Florida.  Mossel is the sole officer 

and director of AEO Publishing, an online publishing company.  Mossel used AEO 

Publishing to collect investor funds.  AEO Publishing has never registered with the 

SEC. 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.8   Filed 01/04/23   Page 8 of 46



- 9 - 
 

24. Banner Co-Op is a Delaware corporation formed in August 1998 

with its principal place of business in Highland, Michigan.  Glaspie is the president 

of Banner Co-Op, an internet services company.  In January 2020, LARA ordered 

Banner Co-Op to cease and desist from offering or selling unregistered securities 

in Michigan due to its involvement with CoinDeal.  In June 2020, Banner Co-Op 

agreed to cease and desist and pay a $15,000 fine; however, in October 2021, the 

Michigan Department of Attorney General obtained an injunction against Banner 

Co-Op due to its ongoing violations of the June 2020 cease and desist order.  More 

recently, in June 2022, the ASC ordered Banner Co-Op to cease and desist from 

offering or selling securities in Alabama due to its involvement with CoinDeal. 

Banner Co-Op has never registered with the SEC.  

25. BannersGo is a Michigan limited liability company formed in 

December 2019 with its principal place of business in Highland, Michigan.  

Glaspie organized BannersGo as an internet services company.  BannersGo has 

never registered with the SEC. 

FACTS 

Chandran Created the “CoinDeal” Scheme 

26. From at least 2018, Chandran repeatedly touted an investment 

opportunity that supposedly revolved around valuable blockchain technology he 

was far along in the process of selling to a group of wealthy buyers at a trillion-

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.9   Filed 01/04/23   Page 9 of 46



- 10 - 
 

dollar valuation. Chandran sought short-term funding for business operating 

expenses during the completion of the purported sale process and promised 

investors substantial returns once the sale closed. This investment opportunity later 

became widely known to investors as “CoinDeal.” 

27. In reality, CoinDeal was merely the most recent iteration of 

Chandran’s prior fraudulent schemes.  No such buyer group existed, there was no 

impending sale, and Chandran was incapable of producing the astronomical returns 

he promised.   

28. Given the public record of his legal troubles, Chandran sought to 

utilize others to solicit investors on his behalf.  Chandran turned to Davidson, an 

investor in one of his prior schemes who remained in contact with Chandran in 

hopes of recouping his prior investment.  Davidson agreed to find others to invest, 

financially motivated by Chandran’s offer to pay him increased returns based on 

the amount he could raise.   

Davidson Recruited Glaspie and Served as a Go-Between for Chandran 

29. Davidson sought avenues for fundraising and identified Glaspie 

through an internet search.  In or around mid-2018, Davidson contacted Glaspie, 

based on Glaspie’s substantial online presence and reputed success with internet 

multi-level marketing programs.   

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.10   Filed 01/04/23   Page 10 of 46



- 11 - 
 

30. Davidson presented the CoinDeal opportunity to Glaspie.  Davidson 

described it as debt financing for a company involved with cryptocurrency and 

artificial intelligence that was pending sale.  Davidson made Glaspie aware of 

Chandran’s involvement and offered Glaspie substantial returns.  

31. Davidson and Glaspie had never met or spoken prior to this initial 

contact by Davidson.  Nonetheless, Glaspie decided to invest and solicit others to 

invest in CoinDeal without conducting any independent research or other due 

diligence on Chandran, Davidson, or CoinDeal.  

32. Specifically, Davidson and Glaspie agreed to solicit investments in 

CoinDeal from Glaspie’s expansive network of internet marketing contacts and to 

transfer monies raised from investors to Chandran and/or the Chandran Entities.   

33. From 2018 to 2022, Davidson relayed information that he received 

from Chandran about CoinDeal to Glaspie to facilitate Glaspie’s solicitation 

efforts.  

34. Chandran regularly used encrypted email, text messages, and phone 

calls to share with Davidson false and misleading information concerning 

CoinDeal.  Chandran typically provided status updates on the supposed deal, 

including but not limited to:  the involvement of foreign central banks and the 

United States Department of Homeland Security; the latest board meetings of the 

consortium of wealthy buyers; the role of certain political figures; and the causes 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.11   Filed 01/04/23   Page 11 of 46



- 12 - 
 

of “temporary” delays to the sale closing.  These updates were designed to lull 

investors and induce them to continue investing in CoinDeal.  

35. To distribute information received from Chandran via encrypted 

message, Davidson typically would copy and paste the latest supposed update 

regarding CoinDeal to an unencrypted email message to Glaspie.   

36. Glaspie would then include the information received from Davidson 

in written and/or oral communications with investors and potential investors, such 

as “CoinDeal Updates” that were made available online and via email, and 

discussed during teleconferences.  

37. For example, Chandran ([email protected]) sent an 

encrypted email to Davidson ([email protected]) on February 28, 2019, with the 

subject line: “Elite Sponsors : Statement Registration Requires Sign Off in SF ; 

Traveling to Obtain for Close of Business PST.” 

 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.12   Filed 01/04/23   Page 12 of 46



- 13 - 
 

38. On the same day, February 28, 2019, Davidson sent Glaspie an 

unencrypted email regarding an “update” with the information he had copied from 

Chandran’s email.  As shown below, the email included information regarding the 

same subject of Chandran’s previous email, including travel to San Francisco for 

“statement registration”: 

 

39. The very next day, in a March 1, 2019 “CoinDeal Update” 

communication, Glaspie shared with investors the same information he had 

received from Davidson the day before concerning “statement registration” in San 

Francisco:  

 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.13   Filed 01/04/23   Page 13 of 46



- 14 - 
 

40. The above-described pattern of communication between Chandran 

and Davidson, followed by communication between Davidson and Glaspie, 

followed by a CoinDeal investor update from Glapsie to investors, occurred 

regularly in the course of the CoinDeal offering. 

Chandran, Davidson, and Glaspie Offered CoinDeal to Investors Through 
Glaspie’s Network 

41. In or around January 2019, Glaspie began promoting the CoinDeal 

opportunity during weekly teleconferences that included over 100,000 invitees 

from his network of contacts.  Glaspie explained that an unnamed Canadian 

resident had a very valuable (but anonymous) artificial intelligence and 

cryptocurrency company that was preparing for an imminent sale to a group of 

billionaire buyers.  Glaspie further explained that the Canadian resident was unable 

to obtain conventional financing due to prior legal issues.  Glaspie did not reveal 

that this unnamed individual was Chandran, and he also failed to disclose that this 

individual had a criminal history in the United States.  

42. Davidson participated in certain of these weekly teleconferences 

alongside Glaspie.  Glaspie explained to investors that Davidson brought the 

opportunity to Glaspie and described him as a representative of CoinDeal.  For 

example, during teleconferences held on March 7, 2020, and August 5, 2020, 

Glaspie referred to Davidson as a CoinDeal trustee.  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.14   Filed 01/04/23   Page 14 of 46



- 15 - 
 

43. In or around January 2019, Glaspie also began making online posts 

and disseminating emails to solicit CoinDeal investments.  The online posts and 

emails included materially false and misleading updates on CoinDeal based on 

information Glaspie received from Chandran via Davidson and a payout scale that 

promised investors outsized returns based on a given investment amount.  

44. To attract prospective investors, Glaspie created his own payout scale 

using Chandran’s astronomical valuations of CoinDeal.  Glaspie utilized a tiered 

payout scale by offering a higher return for larger investment amounts.  As set 

forth below, Glaspie offered increasingly extravagant returns that grew from 10 

times the investment amount in his updates from early 2019 to 500,000 times the 

investment amount in updates from late 2021.  

To Lure Investors, CoinDeal’s Premise Was Little Ventured, Much Gained  

45. In promoting CoinDeal, Glaspie anticipated that large numbers of 

investors would jump at the opportunity to obtain a life-changing financial reward, 

particularly if it did not require much outlay of capital.  Thus, despite having no 

legitimate basis for doing so, Glaspie published online dozens of different high 

rates of return that continued to grow over time to encourage investment in 

CoinDeal, even when the supposedly imminent transaction had yet to occur.  

Based on these promised payouts, investors were misled to expect millions and 

potentially billions in return for a comparatively small, short-term investment.        

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.15   Filed 01/04/23   Page 15 of 46



- 16 - 
 

46. For example, on June 12, 2019, Glaspie published online a promise to 

pay returns of 20-to-1 (2000%) on investments in CoinDeal:  

 

47. On August 28, 2020, Glaspie published online CoinDeal payout terms 

ranging from $750,000 for a mere $250 investment to as high as $1 billion for a 

$100,000 investment: 

 

48. On September 9, 2020 (less than two weeks later), Glaspie published 

online increased CoinDeal payout terms and offered even higher payouts for higher 

investment amounts, including over $2 billion for a $100,000 investment: 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.16   Filed 01/04/23   Page 16 of 46



- 17 - 
 

 

49. The following month, on October 19, 2020, Glaspie again published 

online increased CoinDeal payout terms, ranging from at least $1.5 million for a 

mere $250 investment to over $4 billion for a $100,000 investment:  

 

50. On June 25, 2021, Glaspie published online CoinDeal payout terms 

that were far more extravagant, ranging from at least $12.5 million for a $500 

investment to as high as $56.25 billion, plus a high-end luxury automobile, for a 

$100,000 investment:   

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.17   Filed 01/04/23   Page 17 of 46



- 18 - 
 

 

51. By promising ever-escalating high rates of return, based on false 

valuation information from Chandran (via Davidson), Glaspie was able to create 

and maintain investor interest in CoinDeal, even when the supposed deal failed to 

close on the short-term time horizons advertised to investors. 

Chandran, Davidson, and Glaspie Repeatedly Fabricated Excuses for Why 
CoinDeal’s Closing Was Delayed 

52. During the CoinDeal offering, Chandran, Davidson, and Glaspie 

repeatedly represented that CoinDeal was on the cusp of closing, purposefully 

misleading current and prospective investors to believe they could receive a large 

payout in a matter of days or weeks, not months or years.  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.18   Filed 01/04/23   Page 18 of 46



- 19 - 
 

53. For example, on March 21, 2019, Glaspie stated in his online update 

that he expected CoinDeal to close later that day.  

54. On May 8, 2019, Glaspie stated in his online update that he expected 

CoinDeal to close the following day. 

55. On October 2, 2019, Glaspie stated in his online update that CoinDeal 

was expected to close that night.  

56. On April 11, 2020, Glaspie stated in his online update that CoinDeal 

would be closing within three days.  

57. On January 11, 2021, Glaspie stated in his online update that 

CoinDeal would be closing by January 13, 2021. 

58. Without disclosing his full name, Chandran participated in at least one 

teleconference hosted by Glaspie on October 24, 2020, and told investors that 

CoinDeal’s closing was only a week or two away. 

59. CoinDeal, however, never existed and thus, by design, the deal never 

closed.  Glaspie, based on information from Chandran (via Davidson), provided a 

continuous string of excuses for why closing did not occur.  For example, on 

February 22, 2019, Glaspie falsely claimed in an online post that CoinDeal’s 

closing had been delayed due to a vendor company declaring bankruptcy:  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.19   Filed 01/04/23   Page 19 of 46



- 20 - 
 

 

60. On April 16, 2019, Glaspie falsely claimed in an online post that 

closing of CoinDeal had been delayed because a South Korean bank involved in 

the deal required in-person signatures in Hawaii: 

 

61. On May 7, 2019, Glaspie falsely claimed in an online post that 

CoinDeal’s closing was delayed because an engineer familiar with the company 

systems was sick:  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.20   Filed 01/04/23   Page 20 of 46



- 21 - 
 

 

62. On July 24, 2019, Glaspie falsely claimed in an online post that 

closing was somehow delayed due to an issue involving the number of smart 

phones being supplied by a vendor:  

 

63. During the CoinDeal offering, Glaspie provided other, similarly false 

and misleading explanations, based on information from Chandran (via Davidson), 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.21   Filed 01/04/23   Page 21 of 46



- 22 - 
 

for why the closing of CoinDeal was delayed but remained imminent, in order to 

lull investors and induce them to continue investing in CoinDeal. 

Chandran, Davidson, and Glaspie Provided Investors With Additional False 
Information Regarding CoinDeal 

64. Throughout the relevant time period, prospective investors were 

constantly flooded with opportunities to invest in CoinDeal.  Glaspie continued 

hosting weekly teleconferences and disseminating written updates on a near-daily 

basis (and occasionally multiple times in one day) to promote CoinDeal and solicit 

funds until 2022. 

65. In addition to false statements about the expected profitability of the 

CoinDeal transaction, related false promises of outsized investment returns, and 

myriad false excuses for why CoinDeal had not yet closed, Glaspie and Davidson 

directly made various other material misrepresentations to investors and 

prospective investors. 

66. For example, based on information from Chandran, Davidson falsely 

stated, during a teleconference on March 6, 2021, that Billionaire 1 and Billionaire 

2 were each under consideration as the potential CEO for the CoinDeal business 

enterprise. Billionaire 1 is the founder and executive chairman of a large online 

retailing company.  Billionaire 2 is the CEO of an electric car company.  During 

the same teleconference, Davidson falsely stated that CoinDeal had a market 

capitalization of $50 trillion.  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.22   Filed 01/04/23   Page 22 of 46



- 23 - 
 

67. Based on information from Chandran (via Davidson), Glaspie 

similarly falsely stated in his June 7, 2021 online update that Billionaire 1 was a 

member of the billionaire buyers’ group that planned to purchase one or more 

Chandran Entities:  

 

68. Based on information from Chandran (via Davidson), Glaspie falsely 

stated during a February 20, 2021 teleconference that Billionaire 2 was also a 

member of the buyers’ group that planned to purchase one or more Chandran 

Entities.  

69. Glaspie also falsely claimed that he was under a strict non-disclosure 

agreement, which prevented him from disclosing the name of the seller, the names 

of the buyers, and the name of the company.  In reality, this was merely another 

ruse to avoid scrutiny, as no such non-disclosure agreement existed.  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.23   Filed 01/04/23   Page 23 of 46



- 24 - 
 

70. Glaspie went so far as to falsely deny Chandran’s involvement.  When 

investors asked Glaspie whether Chandran was the seller behind CoinDeal, Glaspie 

denied Chandran’s role in the scheme. 

71. For example, on or about August 19, 2021, a prospective CoinDeal 

investor shared a link containing information about Chandran’s 2018 criminal 

charges and asked Glaspie to “confirm that Neil Chandran is NOT the seller of this 

transaction.”  In response, Glaspie denied that Chandran was involved, admonished 

the individual for “spreading rumors,” and further stated: “Please make this the last 

email on this topic [as] I just don[’]t have time for this disrupting email.”   

72. By way of further example, on or about September 3, 2021, Glaspie 

again denied Chandran’s involvement in CoinDeal to a prospective investor.  On 

this occasion, the concerned individual told Glaspie: “I have been doing some 

digging around the internet. Some people say that ‘Neil’ the owner, is actually 

convicted fraudster Neil Chandran. Please tell me that’s not true.”  The individual 

further described finding “red flags” when searching Chandran’s name on the 

internet.  In response, Glaspie stated: “[W]here these rumors start is a mystery to 

me. The owner is NOT the man u think he is.” 

73. Glaspie also lured investors through false guarantees to investors that 

he would repay all amounts invested in CoinDeal with 7% interest within three 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.24   Filed 01/04/23   Page 24 of 46



- 25 - 
 

years if the CoinDeal sale transaction did not occur.  In reality, Glaspie did not 

have the financial resources to make any such guarantee.  

74. For instance, on November 16, 2020, Glaspie published online in a 

written update his guarantee to pay 7% interest on all amounts invested in 

CoinDeal.  

 

75. To entice further investment, Glaspie offered referral bonuses for 

investors who raised additional funds.  

76. For example, Glaspie published online a 25% referral bonus offer in 

his October 19, 2020 update: 

 

77. Similarly, on November 16, 2020, Glaspie published online in a 

written update his offer of a 25% referral bonus for bringing new investors to 

CoinDeal:  

 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.25   Filed 01/04/23   Page 25 of 46



- 26 - 
 

CoinDeal Investor Funds Flowed Through the Glaspie Entities to Davidson, 
Chandran, and the Chandran Entities 

 
78. At Glaspie’s direction, investors participated in the CoinDeal offering 

through the Glaspie Entities.  

79. Glaspie instructed investors to send payments for CoinDeal 

investments to bank accounts in the name of his entities, Banner Co-Op and 

BannersGo, which he promised to investors he would pass along to Davidson for 

CoinDeal.   

80. The Glaspie Entities received CoinDeal investor funds at certain bank 

institutions, some of which were located in Michigan.  Investors’ funds were 

commingled and transferred to other accounts controlled by Glaspie and his wife, 

Mossel, including accounts in the name of Mossel’s company, AEO Publishing. 

81. At Davidson’s instruction, Glaspie and/or Mossel caused the transfer 

of investor funds, held in accounts in the name of the Glaspie Entities and AEO 

Publishing, to specified bank accounts controlled by Davidson.   

82. At Chandran’s direction, Davidson transferred the funds upstream to 

Chandran, the Chandran Entities, and Chandran’s associates. 

83. Certain funds were also transferred directly from the Glaspie Entities 

to Chandran and the Chandran Entities following the closure of certain of 

Davidson’s bank accounts. 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.26   Filed 01/04/23   Page 26 of 46



- 27 - 
 

84. From 2019 to 2022, Glaspie, through the Glaspie Entities, raised over 

$45 million, as well additional amounts via crypto assets, from thousands of 

CoinDeal investors from multiple states and countries.  

Defendants Misappropriated Investor Funds 

85. Defendants failed to disclose to investors that funds invested in 

CoinDeal would be used for purposes unrelated to CoinDeal.   

86. Chandran received at least $37 million in investor funds for CoinDeal.  

Chandran and the Chandran Entities misappropriated investors’ funds to purchase, 

among other items, a fleet of luxury vehicles, various real estate properties in 

California and Nevada, and a boat.  

87. The Glaspie Entities were controlled by Glaspie, and, unbeknownst to 

investors, he determined how investor funds would be used upon receipt, including 

for his own personal use.  Glaspie, through the Glaspie Entities, misappropriated 

approximately $5.9 million or more by transferring investor funds to other 

accounts that he and Mossel controlled that were unrelated to CoinDeal and by 

directly paying his and Mossel’s personal expenses.  Glaspie used investors’ funds 

to contribute over $100,000 to an insurance policy for his son and to contribute 

$800,000 to an annuity policy in Mossel’s name.  Glaspie also used investor funds 

to cover operating expenses for the Glaspie Entities and transferred millions to his 

associates to pay salaries and for other business ventures. 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.27   Filed 01/04/23   Page 27 of 46



- 28 - 
 

88. Davidson misappropriated at least $3 million of investors’ funds.  

Among other misuse of investor funds, Davidson purchased a $150,000 mobile 

home and used investor funds for personal living expenses.  

Mossel and AEO Publishing Substantially Assisted the CoinDeal Scheme 

89. Mossel was aware of Glaspie’s efforts to raise funds for CoinDeal and 

substantially assisted him in furthering the scheme.   

90. Glaspie typically dictated his investor updates regarding CoinDeal to 

Mossel who would then post the updates online and circulate them via email. 

Mossel knew, recklessly disregarded, should have known, or consciously avoided 

knowing that the information and promises contained in Glaspie’s online updates 

were false and misleading. 

91. Mossel served as a bookkeeper for the Glaspie Entities.  Mossel 

issued invoices to CoinDeal investors on behalf of the Glaspie Entities and 

collected and commingled investor funds in bank accounts held in the name of 

Banner Co-Op, BannersGo, and her own company, AEO Publishing.  

92. In her role as bookkeeper, Mossel regularly communicated with 

investors regarding the amount of their investments and potential payouts.   

93. Mossel also transferred investor funds to Davidson and the Chandran 

Entities.  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.28   Filed 01/04/23   Page 28 of 46



- 29 - 
 

94. Glaspie and Mossel diverted at least $1 million of investors’ funds to 

Mossel and AEO Publishing.  

Knott Also Engaged in the CoinDeal Offering Fraud Through Her Own 
Promotional Activities 

95. Glaspie’s widespread marketing of CoinDeal and his offer of referral 

bonuses attracted promoters who established their own investor groups.  These 

promoters would pool investor funds to reach higher levels on Glaspie’s tiered 

payout scale and obtain larger referral bonuses.  One such promoter was Linda 

Knott.  

96. In February 2021, Knott learned of CoinDeal through one of Glaspie’s 

teleconferences and decided to invest $1,000.  Knott did not know of Glaspie 

before listening to the teleconference, and Knott did not conduct any independent 

research on Glaspie or CoinDeal before investing.  

97. After learning of the aforementioned payout scale and referral 

bonuses promised by Glaspie, Knott started collecting funds for CoinDeal through 

an investor group called Together We Profit. 

98. Together We Profit was a loose arrangement of individuals interested 

in participating in CoinDeal.  Knott instructed members to send funds to accounts 

controlled by Knott, which she represented would be transferred to Glaspie for 

investing in CoinDeal.  During the relevant time period, Together We Profit grew 

to approximately 10,000 members from multiple states and countries. 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.29   Filed 01/04/23   Page 29 of 46



- 30 - 
 

99. Similar to Glaspie, Knott disseminated email updates and hosted 

teleconferences concerning CoinDeal.   

100. In written updates and during teleconferences with current and 

potential investors, Knott repeated misrepresentations made in Glaspie’s written 

CoinDeal updates and teleconferences, including misrepresentations regarding the 

involvement of prominent billionaire buyers.  

101. Knott also repeated Glaspie’s baseless guarantee that CoinDeal 

investors would receive a full refund with 7% interest if the sale did not occur.  

102. Knott facilitated investment by lowering the barrier to entry for 

CoinDeal by allowing prospective investors to participate for as little as $27, which 

was lower than the amounts permitted by Glaspie.  

103. Knott created and disseminated her own payout scale to attract 

investors, including in emails and online posts in October and November 2021.  

Knott’s advertised payout scale grew over time from payouts of $500,000 for each 

$27 investment, to payouts of $14 million for each $27 investment.   

104. During 2021, Knott raised at least $749,000 in fiat currency and 

additional amounts in crypto currency from thousands of investors from multiple 

states, including Michigan, and multiple countries.  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.30   Filed 01/04/23   Page 30 of 46



- 31 - 
 

105. While Knott assured investors she would transmit all of their funds to 

CoinDeal, that was false.  She enriched herself by misappropriating approximately 

$79,000 or more for personal use and purposes unrelated to CoinDeal.  

Defendants Continued the Fraudulent CoinDeal Offering Even After State 
Authorities Ordered Them to Cease and Desist 

106. In January 2020, LARA ordered Glaspie and Banner Co-Op to cease 

and desist from offering or selling unregistered securities in Michigan in 

connection with CoinDeal.  In June 2020, Glaspie settled by agreeing to cease and 

desist and paying a $15,000 fine.  

107. Nevertheless, Glaspie continued offering and selling securities to 

investors in Michigan for CoinDeal. 

108. In October 2021, the Michigan Department of Attorney General 

obtained an injunction against Glaspie and Banner Co-Op for their failure to abide 

by the June 2020 consent order.  The judgment prohibited Glaspie and Banner Co-

Op from continuing to solicit funds from and offering investment opportunities to 

Michigan residents. 

109. On June 1, 2022, the Alabama Securities Commission ordered 

Glaspie, Davidson, and Banner Co-Op to cease and desist from offering or selling 

securities in Alabama.  

110. Despite these actions by state regulatory authorities, Glaspie and 

Davidson continued to accept investor funds.  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.31   Filed 01/04/23   Page 31 of 46



- 32 - 
 

111. In 2021, Knott became aware of LARA’s cease-and-desist order and 

received warnings from a Glaspie associate about the legal ramifications of 

accepting funds from Michigan investors. Nonetheless, Knott created a 

workaround. 

112. In September 2021, Knott addressed prospective Michigan investors 

and informed them that she, in lieu of Glaspie, would accept their funds for a 

higher fee ($30) through a separate company she had created: 

 

113. In April 2022, LARA ordered Knott d/b/a Together We Profit to cease 

and desist from offering or selling unregistered securities in Michigan.  In August 

2022, Knott stipulated to a cease-and-desist order and a $10,000 fine.   

The CoinDeal Scheme Collapses 

114. In June 2022, the CoinDeal scheme largely collapsed when the DOJ 

indicted Chandran for wire fraud and money laundering violations and froze his 

assets. USA v. Chandran, Case No. 22-cr-03077 (D. Neb. 2022).  The indictment 

described a scheme to defraud carried out by Chandran, in which he caused others 

to solicit funds from investors based on the false and misleading portrayal that their 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.32   Filed 01/04/23   Page 32 of 46



- 33 - 
 

investments would soon yield extremely high returns upon the purchase of one or 

more of his entities by a wealthy buyer group. 

115. Even after Chandran’s arrest, Glaspie continued to lull investors with 

confounding rationalizations about the purported legitimacy and ongoing viability 

of CoinDeal.  For example, on June 30, 2022, Glaspie published online the 

following update: 

 

 

116. On July 15, 2022, Glaspie published online another false and 

misleading update: 

 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.33   Filed 01/04/23   Page 33 of 46



- 34 - 
 

117. The vast majority of CoinDeal investors have not received the return 

of their principal investment amounts, and no investors have received any 

promised profits on their investments. 

118. Chandran, Glaspie, and Mossel declined to testify during the SEC’s 

investigation, invoking their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.   

Unregistered Securities Offerings 

119. As set forth above, the Defendants offered and sold CoinDeal 

investments and raised over $45 million from investors in multiple states and 

countries.  

120. The Defendants recruited potential investors through teleconferences, 

online posts, and email.  

121. The Defendants made no efforts to assess potential investors’ 

sophistication or accreditation status, and unaccredited investors participated in the 

CoinDeal offering.  Many investors had no preexisting relationship with the 

Defendants.   

122. The Defendants represented to CoinDeal investors that they would 

pool the money raised from investors and use it to cover operating or per diem 

expenses for CoinDeal.  

123. CoinDeal investors did not exercise any control or authority over the 

operations of CoinDeal.  Chandran exercised ultimate control and authority over 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.34   Filed 01/04/23   Page 34 of 46



- 35 - 
 

CoinDeal, and investors relied on his purported managerial skills, along with the 

efforts of Davidson, Glaspie, and Knott, to provide a return on their investment.  

124. The Defendants used interstate commerce when they offered and sold 

CoinDeal investments in multiple states and countries by, among other things, 

corresponding with potential investors via email and teleconferences and receiving 

investor funds via interstate wire transfers.  

125. The CoinDeal investments offered and sold by the Defendants were 

securities.   

126. No registration statement was ever filed with the SEC or has ever 

been in effect with respect to any offers and sales of CoinDeal investments.   

COUNT I 
Violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act 

[15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)] 
(Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo) 

 
127. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference 

as though fully set forth herein. 

128. By engaging in the conduct described above, Defendants Chandran, 

Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo, in the offer and sale of 

securities, by the use of the means and instruments of transportation or 

communication in interstate commerce or by use of the mails, directly or 

indirectly, (i) employed devices, schemes and artifices to defraud; (ii) obtained 

money and property by means of untrue statements of material facts and omissions 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.35   Filed 01/04/23   Page 35 of 46



- 36 - 
 

to state material facts necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of 

the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; and (iii) engaged 

in transactions, practices, and courses of business which operated or would operate 

as a fraud or deceit upon the purchasers of such securities.  

129. Defendants Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and 

BannersGo acted intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently, in engaging 

in the conduct described above.   

130. By engaging in the conduct described above, Defendants Chandran, 

Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo violated Section 17(a) of 

the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)]. 

COUNT II 
Violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act 

and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5 
[15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5] 

(Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo) 

131. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference. 

132. By engaging in the conduct described above, Defendants Chandran, 

Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo, in connection with the 

purchase and sale of securities, by the use of the means and instrumentalities of 

interstate commerce and by the use of the mails, directly and indirectly, (i) 

employed devices, schemes and artifices to defraud; (ii) made untrue statements of 

material fact and omitted to state material facts necessary in order to make the 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.36   Filed 01/04/23   Page 36 of 46



- 37 - 
 

statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, 

not misleading; and (iii) engaged in acts, practices and courses of business which 

operated or would have operated as a fraud and deceit upon purchasers of 

securities and upon other persons. 

133. Defendants Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and 

BannersGo acted intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly, in engaging in the 

fraudulent conduct described above.  

134. Through the foregoing, Defendants Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, 

Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act 

[15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 thereunder [17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5].   

COUNT III 
Violations of Section 5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act 

[15 U.S.C. § 77e(a) and (c)] 
(Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo) 

 
135. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference. 

136. From in or about 2019 through in or about 2022, Defendants 

Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo, directly or 

indirectly, as to CoinDeal securities: (a) made use of the means or instruments of 

transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to sell 

securities through the use or medium of a prospectus or otherwise; or carried 

securities or caused such securities to be carried through the mails or in interstate 

commerce, by means or instruments of transportation, for the purpose of sale or 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.37   Filed 01/04/23   Page 37 of 46



- 38 - 
 

delivery after sale; and (b) made use of the means or instruments of transportation 

or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails to offer to sell or to offer 

to buy, through the use or medium of any prospectus or otherwise, securities 

without a registration statement having been filed with the SEC or being in effect 

as to such securities. 

137. No registration statements were filed with the SEC or were in effect in 

connection with offers or sales of CoinDeal securities by Defendants Chandran, 

Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo, and no exemption from 

the registration requirements applied to sales by Defendants Chandran, Davidson, 

Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo.   

138. By engaging in the conduct described above, Defendants Chandran, 

Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo violated, and unless 

restrained and enjoined are reasonably likely to continue to violate Sections 5(a) 

and (c) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and (c)]. 

COUNT IV 
Aiding and Abetting Violations of  
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act 
and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5(b) 

[15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5] 
(Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo) 

 
139. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference. 

140. As described above, Defendant Chandran, directly or indirectly, in 

connection with the purchase and sale of CoinDeal securities, by the use of the 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.38   Filed 01/04/23   Page 38 of 46



- 39 - 
 

means and instrumentalities of interstate commerce and by the use of the mails, 

intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly made untrue statements of material fact and 

omitted to state material facts necessary in order to make the statements made, in 

the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading.  

141. By engaging in the conduct described, Defendant Chandran violated 

Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5(b) 

thereunder [17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5].  

142. Defendants Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo 

intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly provided substantial assistance to 

Defendant Chandran.   

143. By reason of the foregoing, Defendants Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, 

Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo aided and abetted the violations of Section 10(b) of 

the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder by Defendant Chandran and, 

pursuant to Section 20(e) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(e)], Defendants 

Davidson, Glaspie, Knott, Banner Co-Op, and BannersGo are liable to the same 

extent as Defendant Chandran for his violations of Sections 10(b) of the Exchange 

Act and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder. 

  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.39   Filed 01/04/23   Page 39 of 46



- 40 - 
 

COUNT V 
Aiding and Abetting Violations of  
Section 17(a) of the Securities Act 

[15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)] 
(Mossel and AEO Publishing) 

 
144. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference. 

145. As described above, Defendant Glaspie, directly or indirectly, in the 

offer and sale of CoinDeal securities by the use of the means and instruments of 

transportation or communication in interstate commerce or by use of the mails, 

intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently, (i) employed devices, schemes 

and artifices to defraud; (ii) obtained money and property by means of untrue 

statements of material facts and omissions to state material facts necessary in order 

to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which they were 

made, not misleading; and (iii) engaged in transactions, practices, and courses of 

business which operated or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon the purchasers 

of such securities. 

146. By engaging in the conduct described, Defendant Glaspie violated 

Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)].   

147.  Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing intentionally, knowingly, or 

recklessly provided substantial assistance to Defendant Glaspie.   

148. By reason of the foregoing, Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing 

aided and abetted the violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, by 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.40   Filed 01/04/23   Page 40 of 46



- 41 - 
 

Defendant Glaspie and, pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. 

§ 77o(b)], Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing are liable to the same extent as 

Defendant Glaspie for his violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act.  

COUNT VI 
Aiding and Abetting Violations of  
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act 

and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5 
[15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5] 

(Mossel and AEO Publishing) 

149. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference. 

150. As described above, Defendant Glaspie, directly or indirectly, in 

connection with the purchase and sale of CoinDeal securities, by the use of the 

means and instrumentalities of interstate commerce and by the use of the mails, 

intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly, (i) employed devices, schemes and artifices 

to defraud; (ii) made untrue statements of material fact and omitted to state 

material facts necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the 

circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; and (iii) engaged in 

acts, practices and courses of business which operated or would have operated as a 

fraud and deceit upon purchasers of securities and upon other persons.  

151. By engaging in the conduct described, Defendant Glaspie violated 

Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 thereunder 

[17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5].  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.41   Filed 01/04/23   Page 41 of 46



- 42 - 
 

152. Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing intentionally, knowingly, or 

recklessly provided substantial assistance to Defendant Glaspie.   

153. By reason of the foregoing, Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing 

aided and abetted the violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 

10b-5 thereunder by Defendant Glaspie and, pursuant to Section 20(e) of the 

Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(e)], Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing are 

liable to the same extent as Defendant Glaspie for his violations of Sections 10(b) 

of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.   

COUNT VII 
Aiding and Abetting Violations of  

Sections 5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act 
 [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and (c)] 
(Mossel and AEO Publishing) 

 
154. Paragraphs 1 through 126 are realleged and incorporated by reference. 

155. As described above, Defendant Glaspie offered and sold CoinDeal 

securities when no registration statements were filed with the SEC or were in effect 

in connection with offers or sales of such securities, and no exemption from the 

registration requirements applied to Defendant Glaspie’s sales. 

156. By engaging in this conduct, Defendant Glaspie violated Sections 5(a) 

and (c) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and (c)]. 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.42   Filed 01/04/23   Page 42 of 46



- 43 - 
 

157. Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing intentionally, knowingly, or 

recklessly provided substantial assistance to the unregistered offers and sales by 

Defendant Glaspie. 

158. By reason of the foregoing, Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing 

aided and abetted the violations of Section 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act, by 

Defendant Glaspie and, pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. 

§ 77o(b)], Defendants Mossel and AEO Publishing are liable to the same extent as 

Defendant Glaspie for his violations of Sections 5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act. 

RELIEF REQUESTED 

 THEREFORE, the SEC requests that this Court: 

I. 

 Permanently enjoin Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, 

attorneys and those persons in active concert or participation with Defendants who 

receive actual notice of the order of this Court, by personal service or otherwise, 

and each of them from, directly or indirectly, engaging in the transactions, acts, 

practices or courses of business described above, or in conduct of similar purport 

and object, in violation of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)]; 

Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 thereunder 

[17 CFR § 240.10b-5]; and Section 5 of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77e]; 

  

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.43   Filed 01/04/23   Page 43 of 46



- 44 - 
 

II. 

 Order Defendants to disgorge all ill-gotten gains and/or unjust enrichment 

received directly or indirectly, with pre-judgment interest thereon, as a result of the 

alleged violations, pursuant to Exchange Act Sections 21(d)(5) and 21(d)(7) [15 

U.S.C. §§ 78u(d)(5) and 78u(d)(7)]; 

III. 

Order Defendants to pay civil penalties pursuant to Section 20(d) of the 

Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(d)] and Section 21(d)(3) of the Exchange Act [15 

U.S.C. § 78u(d)(3)];  

IV. 

 Enter an Order, pursuant to Section 21(d)(2) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 

§ 78u(d)(2)] permanently prohibiting Defendants Chandran, Davidson, Glaspie, 

Knott, and Mossel from serving as an officer or director of any issuer that has a 

class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 [15 U.S.C. § 78l] of the 

Exchange Act or that is required to file reports pursuant to Section 15(d) of the 

Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78o(d)]; 

V. 

 Permanently enjoin Defendant Chandran from directly or indirectly, 

including, but not limited to, through any entity owned or controlled by Chandran, 

participating in the issuance, purchase, offer, or sale of any security; provided, 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.44   Filed 01/04/23   Page 44 of 46



- 45 - 
 

however, that such injunction shall not prevent Chandran from purchasing or 

selling securities for his own personal account; and 

VI. 

 Grant any other relief this Court deems appropriate. 

JURY DEMAND 

 Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff 

demands that this case be tried to a jury. 

Dated:  January 4, 2023    Respectfully Submitted, 
 

UNITED STATES SECURITIES 
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 
 
 s/Michael D. Foster 
Michael D. Foster, Illinois Bar No. 6257063 
Dante A. Roldán, Illinois Bar No. 6316972 
Caryn Trombino, Illinois Bar No. 6284159 
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 
Chicago Regional Office 
175 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 1450 
Chicago, Illinois 60604 
(312) 353-7390 
(312) 353-7398 (facsimile) 
[email protected]  
[email protected] 
[email protected] 
 
Local Counsel: 
DAWN N. ISON 
United States Attorney 
Eastern District of Michigan 
 
KEVIN ERSKINE (P69120) 
Assistant United States Attorney 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.45   Filed 01/04/23   Page 45 of 46

mailto:[email protected]


- 46 - 
 

Eastern District of Michigan 
211 W. Fort Street, Ste. 2001 
Detroit, MI 48226 
Tel: (313) 226-9610 
Email: [email protected] 
 
Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case 2:23-cv-10017-NGE-EAS   ECF No. 1, PageID.46   Filed 01/04/23   Page 46 of 46


	UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
	EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
	UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION