2003-04-28 sec-litreleases pdf 14 KB 3,273 chars

SEC v. : 03 Civ. 2937 (WHP)

summary

Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. settled SEC securities fraud charges for issuing misleading research to support investment banking clients, resulting in a court-ordered Distribution Fund to compensate investors who bought SonicWall, Micromuse, CAIS Internet, or Digital River stock during specified periods between November 2000 and April 2002, without admission of liability.

paragraph

Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. agreed to a civil settlement with the SEC over allegations of securities fraud involving misleading research recommendations on four technology stocks—SonicWall, Micromuse, CAIS Internet, and Digital River—issued during specific periods between November 2000 and April 2002 to benefit investment banking clients. As part of the settlement, Bear Stearns paid a federal penalty to establish a Distribution Fund, which includes the payment plus any interest earned, to compensate eligible investors who purchased these securities during the court-defined timeframes. The court explicitly stated that the identification of the securities and purchase periods was solely for administrative purposes and not a judicial finding of liability, and no criminal charges were filed.

narrative

Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. settled civil charges brought by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for securities fraud related to misleading research recommendations on four technology stocks: SonicWall, Micromuse, CAIS Internet, and Digital River. The SEC alleged that Bear Stearns issued overly positive analyst reports during specific periods—SonicWall (Jan. 25–May 15, 2001), Micromuse (July 18–Oct. 16, 2001), CAIS Internet (Nov. 7, 2000–April 24, 2001), and Digital River (Jan. 30–April 1, 2002)—to support its investment banking relationships, thereby misleading investors. As part of the settlement, Bear Stearns paid a federal penalty to create a Distribution Fund, consisting of the payment plus any interest earned, to compensate eligible investors who purchased these securities during the designated windows. A court order on October 31, 2003, formally defined the equity securities and purchase periods solely for the administrative purpose of distributing funds, emphasizing that this identification was not a judicial finding of liability. The Distribution Fund Administrator was tasked with designing a fair and cost-effective plan to distribute the funds to eligible recipients. No criminal charges were filed, and the resolution was purely civil, focusing on investor restitution rather than punitive sanctions. The settlement reflected broader regulatory efforts to address conflicts of interest between research and investment banking divisions at major Wall Street firms.

Enriched metadata

Scheme
financial-fraud (100%)
Court
Southern District of New York
Classified financial-fraud(confidence 100%). EDGAR detection: forms 10-K/10-Q/8-K/NT 10-K· recall 67% / precision 23%. detection rule →
Parties
Securities and Exchange CommissionBear, Stearns & Co. Inc.
Keywords
distribution funddistributionequity securitiessecurities questionquestion relevantfundfund planfinalsecuritiesequityincrelevant periodperiod purchasequestionrelevant

Extracted insights

Entities 6
  • company cais internet inc.
  • company creation of a distribution fund
  • company digital river, inc.
  • company distribution fund
  • company micromuse, inc.
  • company sonicwall, inc.
Triples 9
  • Section II of the Final Judgment calls for creation of a Distribution Fund
  • Distribution Fund Administrator shall formulate Distribution Fund Plan
  • Distribution Fund Administrator shall administer Distribution Fund Plan
  • a person must have purchased equity securities in question
  • SonicWall, Inc. was purchased during Jan. 25, 2001 – May 15, 2001
  • Micromuse, Inc. was purchased during July 18, 2001 – Oct. 16, 2001
  • CAIS Internet Inc. was purchased during Nov. 7, 2000 – April 24, 2001
  • Digital River, Inc. was purchased during Jan. 30, 2002 – April 1, 2002
  • Distribution Fund consists of Defendant’s Federal Payment plus any income and interest earned thereon
Text layers
Extracted body text (3,273c)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 
________________________________________________ 
        : 
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, : 
        : 
                                                Plaintiff,                                    :            Civil            Action            No.            
        : 
                        -against-                                                            :            03            Civ.            2937            (WHP)            
        : 
BEAR, STEARNS & CO. INC.,    : 
        : 
    Defendant.   : 
________________________________________________: 
 
ORDER REGARDING DISTRIBUTION FUND PLAN 
 
 On October 31, 2003, the Court signed a Final Judgment as to Defendant Bear, Stearns & 
Co. Inc. (“Final Judgment”).  Section II of the Final Judgment calls for the creation of a 
Distribution Fund, which consists of Defendant’s Federal Payment plus any income and interest 
earned thereon.
1
  Under Section V.A of the Final Judgment, “[t]he Distribution Fund 
Administrator shall formulate and administer a Distribution Fund Plan ... intended to provide for 
the equitable, cost-effective distribution of funds to Eligible Distribution Fund Recipients.”  
Under Section V.C.1 of the Final Judgment, to be an Eligible Distribution Fund Recipient, a 
person must have purchased “equity securities in question” through Defendant during the 
“relevant period of purchase.”  Also under Section V.C.1, “[i]dentification of the ‘equity 
securities in question’ and the ‘relevant period of purchase’ for each such equity security will be 
set forth (solely for the purpose of administering the Distribution Fund Plan) in a further order of 
the Court.” 
                                                
 
1
 All defined terms in the Final Judgment apply to this Order. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the “equity securities in question” and the 
“relevant period of purchase” for each such equity security, as those terms are used in Section 
V.C.1 of the Final Judgment, are as follows: 
 
Equity Securities in Question   Relevant Periods of Purchase
 SonicWall, Inc.    Jan. 25, 2001 – May 15, 2001 
 Micromuse, Inc.    July 18, 2001 – Oct. 16, 2001 
            CAIS            Internet            Inc.                          Nov. 7, 2000 – April 24, 2001 
 Digital River, Inc.    Jan. 30, 2002 – April 1, 2002 
 
The identification of “equity securities in question” and “relevant periods of purchase” made 
herein is solely for the purpose of facilitating the efficient administration of the Distribution 
Fund Plan, is not a judicial or Commission finding, and is not intended to have precedential 
effect in other actions. 
            SO            ORDERED.            
 
Dated: New York, New York 
            October            31,            2003            
 
 
                                                                        ________________________________            
                                                                        WILLIAM            H.            PAULEY            III            
                                                                        UNITED            STATES            DISTRICT            JUDGE            
 
- 2 - 
OCR text (2,606c · tika · 95% conf)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 
________________________________________________ 
        : 
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, : 
        : 
    Plaintiff,   : Civil Action No. 
        : 
  -against-     : 03 Civ. 2937 (WHP) 
        : 
BEAR, STEARNS & CO. INC.,    : 
        : 
    Defendant.   : 
________________________________________________: 
 

ORDER REGARDING DISTRIBUTION FUND PLAN 
 
 On October 31, 2003, the Court signed a Final Judgment as to Defendant Bear, Stearns & 

Co. Inc. (“Final Judgment”).  Section II of the Final Judgment calls for the creation of a 

Distribution Fund, which consists of Defendant’s Federal Payment plus any income and interest 

earned thereon.1  Under Section V.A of the Final Judgment, “[t]he Distribution Fund 

Administrator shall formulate and administer a Distribution Fund Plan … intended to provide for 

the equitable, cost-effective distribution of funds to Eligible Distribution Fund Recipients.”  

Under Section V.C.1 of the Final Judgment, to be an Eligible Distribution Fund Recipient, a 

person must have purchased “equity securities in question” through Defendant during the 

“relevant period of purchase.”  Also under Section V.C.1, “[i]dentification of the ‘equity 

securities in question’ and the ‘relevant period of purchase’ for each such equity security will be 

set forth (solely for the purpose of administering the Distribution Fund Plan) in a further order of 

the Court.” 

                                                 
1 All defined terms in the Final Judgment apply to this Order. 



 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the “equity securities in question” and the 

“relevant period of purchase” for each such equity security, as those terms are used in Section 

V.C.1 of the Final Judgment, are as follows: 

 Equity Securities in Question   Relevant Periods of Purchase
 SonicWall, Inc.    Jan. 25, 2001 – May 15, 2001 
 Micromuse, Inc.    July 18, 2001 – Oct. 16, 2001 
 CAIS Internet Inc.    Nov. 7, 2000 – April 24, 2001 
 Digital River, Inc.    Jan. 30, 2002 – April 1, 2002 
 
The identification of “equity securities in question” and “relevant periods of purchase” made 

herein is solely for the purpose of facilitating the efficient administration of the Distribution 

Fund Plan, is not a judicial or Commission finding, and is not intended to have precedential 

effect in other actions. 

 SO ORDERED. 

 
Dated: New York, New York 
 October 31, 2003 
 
 
      ________________________________ 
      WILLIAM H. PAULEY III 
      UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 

- 2 -