SEC v. Gregory A. Ciccone; Platinum Travel and Entertainment, L.L.C.; and Platinum Enterprises & Concierge Services, Inc., No. 2:21-cv-17768, District of New Jersey (Sept. 29, 2021) — Complaint

Leslie J. Hughes (Colo. Bar 15042)
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Denver Regional Office
1961 Stout Street, Suite 1700
Denver, CO 80294-1961
Telephone 303-844-1000
Email: [email protected]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case No. 21-cv-17768

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,

   Plaintiff,

   v.

GREGORY A. CICCONE, and
PLATINUM TRAVEL AND ENTERTAINMENT, L.L.C.,

   Defendants,

PLATINUM ENTERPRISES & CONCIERGE SERVICES, INC.,

   Relief Defendant.

__________________________________________________________________

COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL SECURITIES
LAWS AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND
__________________________________________________________________

 Plaintiff United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), 1961
Stout Street, Suite 1700, Denver, Colorado 80294, alleges the following for its

2

Complaint against Defendants Gregory A. Ciccone and Platinum Travel and
Entertainment, L.L.C., and Relief Defendant Platinum Enterprises & Concierge
Services, Inc., whose last known addresses or principal places of business are set
forth below:
Gregory A. Ciccone
4015 Aspen Grove DR
Franklin, TN 37067-1424

Platinum Travel and Entertainment, L.L.C.
23 Dogwood Court
Woodland Park, NJ 07424

Platinum Enterprises & Concierge Services, Inc.
4026 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 300
San Diego, CA 92106

SUMMARY
1. Defendant Gregory A. Ciccone, a convicted felon acting through his
company, Defendant Platinum Travel and Entertainment L.L.C. (“Platinum”),
defrauded investors out of over $1.5 million.
2. From July 2018 through February 2020 (the “Relevant Period”),
Ciccone and Platinum offered and sold promissory notes to investors for the
purported purpose of securing hotel reservations as part of Platinum’s luxury travel
business.  Ciccone and Platinum told investors that Platinum was a successful
business that reserved blocks of rooms at luxury hotels and resold the reservations
at a profit, from which investors would be repaid principal and interest on their

3

notes ranging from 15% to 50% in 45 to 146 days.  Rather than use investor money
in connection with Platinum’s luxury travel business as he had promised, Ciccone
misappropriated the vast majority of the money and used much of the remainder to
make Ponzi-like payments.  Ciccone used investor money to, among other things,
purchase a luxury car, pay credit cards, and pay for personal travel.
3. Ciccone initially solicited investors directly and later recruited an
acquaintance (referred to here as “Sales Agent 1”) to solicit investors in Platinum.
Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 his phony story about his successful, luxury travel
business with the knowledge and expectation that Sales Agent 1 would disseminate
those false and misleading statements to prospective investors.  Ciccone never
disclosed to investors that he was looting the money raised, that Platinum did not
have sufficient income from its luxury travel business to repay investors, that due
to a prior felony criminal conviction he was not permitted to enter into promissory
notes, or that by March 2019 Platinum was not making timely payment on
promissory notes that had already come due.
4. From August through September 2019, Ciccone directed investors
who purchased promissory notes from Platinum to transfer their funds to bank
accounts held in the name of Platinum Enterprises & Concierge Services, Inc.
(“Platinum Enterprises”), an entity he controlled.  Platinum Enterprises provided
no consideration for receipt of the investors’ funds and was unjustly enriched.

4

5. As a result of the conduct described herein, Ciccone and Platinum
(referred to together as “Defendants” herein) violated and, unless restrained and
enjoined, will continue to violate the securities registration and antifraud
provisions of Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933
(“Securities Act”) [15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a), 77e(c), 77q(a)], Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule
10b-5 thereunder [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5].  Alternatively, Ciccone is liable for
violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) under Section
20(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(b)], for activities taken through or by
means of Sales Agent 1, whom he enlisted to solicit investors.
NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AND REQUESTED RELIEF
6. The SEC brings this action pursuant to authority conferred on it by
Section 20(b) and (d) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§   77t(b) and (d)] and
Section 21(d) and (e) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 78u(d) and (e)].
7. The SEC seeks entry of permanent injunctions; disgorgement of ill-
gotten gains derived from the conduct alleged in the Complaint plus prejudgment
interest thereon [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(7)]; 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)]; an order prohibiting Ciccone, directly or indirectly,
including, but not limited to, through any entity owned or controlled by him, from

5

participating in the issuance, purchase, offer, or sale of any security, provided,
however, that such injunction shall not prevent Ciccone from purchasing or selling
securities for his own personal   accounts; an order barring Ciccone from serving as
an officer or director of a public company; an order directing Platinum Enterprises
to disgorge its ill-gotten gains with prejudgment interest; and such other relief that
the court may deem appropriate.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
8. The court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Sections 20(b),
20(d)(1), and 22(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77t(b), 77t(d)(1), and
77v(a)], and Sections 21(d)(1), 21(e), and 27(a) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§
78u(d)(1), 78u(e), and 78aa(a)].
9. In connection with the conduct alleged in the Complaint, Defendants,
directly or indirectly, made use of the means or instruments of transportation or
communication in interstate commerce, the means or instrumentalities of interstate
commerce, or of the mails, in connection with the acts, practices, and courses of
business set forth in this Complaint.  Defendants used emails, text messages and
the Internet to conduct their fraudulent activities, and caused wire transfers of
funds to be made and received through communications in interstate commerce.
10. Venue lies in the District of New Jersey pursuant to Section 22(a) of
the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77v(a)] and Section 27(a) of the Exchange Act [15

6

U.S.C. § 78aa(a)].  Platinum maintains its principal place of business in this
judicial district.  Ciccone and Platinum engaged in certain of the acts, practices,
transactions, and courses of business alleged in this Complaint within the District
of New Jersey, including, but not limited to, the offer and sales of promissory notes
to an investor who resides in New Jersey, and directing investors to send wire
transfers for the purchase of promissory notes, which transfers were effected in this
District.
DEFENDANTS AND RELIEF DEFENDANT
11. Defendant Gregory A. Ciccone, age 44, transacted business and
offered and sold securities while he resided in Little Falls, New Jersey from
approximately 2017 through November 2018, and resided in San Diego, California
from approximately November 2018 through at least February 2020. Ciccone’s last
known address is in Franklin, Tennessee.
12. Defendant Platinum Travel and Entertainment L.L.C. is a New
Jersey limited liability company with its principal place of business in Woodland
Park, New Jersey from approximately 2017 through November 2018, and in San
Diego, California from approximately November 2018 through at least February
2020.  Ciccone is the sole owner, managing member, and president of Platinum.
13. Relief Defendant Platinum Enterprises & Concierge Services, Inc.
is a California corporation with its principal place of business in San Diego,

7

California.  Ciccone is the sole owner and chief executive officer of Platinum
Enterprises.
FACTS
I. Defendants Raised Money From Investors Through the Offer and Sale
of Securities.

14. From approximately July 2018 through February 2020, Ciccone and
Platinum solicited money from, and offered and sold securities in the form of
short-term, high-interest promissory notes to,   investors.  Ciccone elicited the help
of Sales Agent 1 starting in May 2019, who, working at the direction of Ciccone
and on behalf of Platinum, also solicited and offered and sold securities to
investors.  Collectively, they raised approximately $1.5 million from at least 22
investors.
15. From approximately July 2018 through February 2020, Ciccone
offered and sold, directly or indirectly, short-term, high-interest promissory notes
(the “Ciccone Promissory Notes”).  Ciccone personally solicited investors, at least
one of whom also solicited others based upon the information provided by
Ciccone.  Ciccone ultimately raised $491,271 from at least five investors.
16. Beginning in approximately May 2019 and lasting through at least
October 2019, Ciccone and Platinum offered and sold, directly or indirectly, short-
term, high-interest promissory notes (the “Platinum Promissory Notes”) through
Sales Agent 1.  Ciccone provided information to Sales Agent 1 who, at Ciccone’s

8

direction and on behalf of Platinum, solicited at least 17 investors and raised over
$1 million from those investors.
17. The Ciccone Promissory Notes and the Platinum Promissory Notes
had terms that varied from 45 to 146 days, and paid interest ranging from 15% to
50% per term.  Ciccone signed the Ciccone Promissory Notes individually.
Ciccone signed the Platinum Promissory Notes individually and as the managing
member of Platinum.  Investors in both promissory notes believed, based on
Ciccone’s and Sales Agent 1’s representations, that their money would be used for
the same purpose – to reserve blocks of rooms at luxury hotels whose reservations
would be resold at a profit.
18. Section 2(a)(1) of the Securities Act and Section 3(a)(10) of the
Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77b(a)(1) and 78c(a)(10)] define “security” to
include, among other things, any “note.”
19. The Ciccone Promissory Notes and the Platinum Promissory Notes
are securities in the form of “notes.”
20. The Ciccone Promissory Notes and Platinum Promissory Notes are
securities because: (i) Ciccone and Platinum entered into the promissory notes to
finance Platinum’s purported luxury travel business; (ii) the investors were
primarily motivated by the high interest rate payable under the promissory notes
and did not enter into the promissory notes for any consumer purpose; and (iii)

9

investors viewed the promissory notes as investments with guaranteed returns of
between 15 and 50 percent during the terms of the respective promissory notes.
21. Ciccone directed investors to wire the funds for the purchase of
Ciccone Promissory Notes or Platinum Promissory Notes to Platinum’s or
Platinum Enterprises’ bank accounts.
22. While the majority of the money was sent to Platinum’s bank
accounts, from August through October 2019, Ciccone directed various investors
to send payment for the purchase of Platinum Promissory Notes to Platinum
Enterprises’ bank accounts.  Over $309,000 of investor funds was deposited in
Platinum Enterprises’ bank accounts.  Platinum Enterprises did not provide any
consideration for receipt of this money.
23. Ciccone was the only authorized signatory and had sole control over
both Platinum’s and Platinum Enterprises’ bank accounts.
II. Defendants Misappropriated and Misused Investor Money, and
Engaged in Other Deceptive Conduct.

24. During the Relevant Period, Defendants engaged in deceptive conduct
to defraud investors, and engaged in numerous acts, practices, and courses of
business that defrauded the investors.
25. Ciccone and Sales Agent 1 solicited investors through one-on-one oral
and written communications.  To raise money from investors through the sale of
Platinum Promissory Notes, Ciccone provided Sales Agent 1 a “marketing deck,”

10

which was used by Sales Agent 1 in the solicitation.  The marketing deck described
Platinum as a “luxury travel concierge” with “unique relationships” that allowed it
to provide high-end experiences to its   clients. The marketing deck also described
the services that Platinum offered and provided information on the background of
the company and its target market.
26. Ciccone, Platinum, and Sales Agent 1, working at the direction of
Ciccone and on behalf of Platinum, told investors that Platinum would use investor
funds to pay advance deposits to reserve luxury travel for Platinum’s clients, and
that Platinum earned money based on fees it received from hotels and others in
connection with its luxury travel concierge business.
27. Contrary to the representations regarding the intended use of
proceeds, most investor funds raised were not used to secure the hotel reservations
as represented.  Instead, Ciccone misappropriated or misused virtually all of the
investor funds raised.
28. First, Ciccone misappropriated approximately $1.3 million of investor
funds.  Ciccone used the money to pay for various personal expenses, including
approximately:  $54,330 to purchase a BMW automobile; another $235,000 to pay
for clothes, wine, and other personal items; and $329,000 was withdrawn in cash.
Ciccone and Platinum did not disclose that Ciccone would use investor funds for
personal expenses.

11

29. Second, Ciccone and Platinum used approximately $139,000 of
investor funds to make Ponzi-like payments to earlier investors with overdue notes.
30. Platinum did not earn sufficient profits from the travel concierge
business to repay the principal and interest accrued on the promissory notes as they
became due.  Accordingly, as promissory notes became due, in certain cases,
Ciccone and Platinum made interest and principal payments with new investor
money.
31. For example, on or about July 24, 2019, Ciccone and Platinum
obtained approximately $200,000 from the sale of Platinum Promissory Notes.  On
or about August 1, 2019, Ciccone and Platinum used this new investor money to
make Ponzi-like payments of $32,000 and $47,672.69 to two investors whose
promissory notes were due.
32. Third, Ciccone and Platinum paid Sales Agent 1 approximately
$16,000 out of funds received from investors.  These payments were not disclosed
to investors.
33. Ciccone also engaged in deceptive conduct by fabricating documents
and providing them to investors in order to delay investors’ requests for overdue
payments of principal and interest.  For example, Ciccone provided investors with
a fabricated August 2019 email purportedly from a bank employee, his personal
financial statement, and a bank statement for a family trust account, as discussed

12

below in paragraphs 102 through 108.
34. In addition to the deceptive conduct described above, Defendants also
made numerous other material misrepresentations and omissions to investors as
detailed below.
35. In engaging in the fraudulent and deceptive conduct, Ciccone, as the
managing member, sole owner, and president of Platinum, acted as an agent of
Platinum and his scienter and conduct is imputed to Platinum.
36. In connection with each fraudulent practice, Defendants knew or were
reckless in not knowing, and should have known, that they were engaging in
fraudulent and deceptive conduct.  Defendants had full knowledge of and control
over Platinum’s and Platinum Enterprises’ bank accounts and the uses of investor
funds, the creation and dissemination of fabricated documents, as well as the
material misrepresentations and omissions made to investors.
III. In Connection with the Offering of Securities, Ciccone and Platinum
Made Material Misstatements and Omissions.

37. Throughout the Relevant Period, in the offer and sale of the
promissory notes, Ciccone and Platinum made numerous false and misleading
statements and omissions of material facts, both orally and in electronic
communications, about the nature and success of Platinum’s business operations.
38. Ciccone determined the content of and had ultimate authority over his
statements and any written materials used to solicit prospective Platinum investors,

13

including the documents provided to Sales Agent 1.
39. Ciccone, as the managing member, sole owner, and president of
Platinum, made the false statements and omissions and distributed documents as an
agent of Platinum.  Ciccone’s statements and scienter are imputed to Platinum.
A. Ciccone and Platinum Made Material Misstatements and Omissions to
Sales Agent 1 With the Knowledge and Expectation that He Would
Provide the Information to Investors to Solicit the Purchase of
Promissory Notes.

40. In or about April 2019, Ciccone was introduced to Sales Agent 1 by a
mutual acquaintance.  Ciccone requested that Sales Agent 1 solicit investors in
connection with the Platinum Promissory Notes.
41. In a phone call in April 2019 and in later conversations, Ciccone told
Sales Agent 1 that Platinum and Ciccone operated a successful, high-end luxury
travel concierge business that reserved blocks of rooms at luxury hotels, which
they resold at a profit.  Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 that Platinum and Ciccone
wanted to raise approximately $450,000 through the sale of promissory notes to
secure hotel room reservations, and the loans were to be repaid from the profits
earned from the resale of the room reservations.
42. This information was false.  As of the time of this communication,
Ciccone and Platinum had prior overdue promissory notes that they were unable to
pay.  Moreover, due to a prior criminal conviction and resulting conditions of
supervised release, Ciccone was prohibited from entering into loan agreements

14

without prior approval of his probation officer, approval that he had not requested
nor received.
43. On April 24, 2019, Ciccone sent an email to Sales Agent 1 confirming
his telephone conversation with Sales Agent 1 and included the “marketing deck,”
described above in paragraph 25, which provided information about Platinum’s
successful business.
44. Starting in May 2019, Ciccone sent Sales Agent 1 a series of emails
describing various hotel reservations that Platinum purportedly held, for which
Ciccone was seeking funding through the sale of Platinum Promissory Notes.
45. On May 13, 2019, Ciccone sent Sales Agent 1 an email containing a
list of Platinum’s “immediate bookings,” including a reservation for $24,000 at
Punta Mita, Mexico and other reservations totaling $211,000 at hotels through June
2019.  Ciccone requested Sales Agent 1 solicit investors to purchase Platinum
Promissory Notes so Platinum could pay for these “bookings.”  Ciccone wrote that
the loans would be repaid “on a 60 day payment schedule from the check-out date”
on the reservation.
46. Ciccone sent Sales Agent 1 an email on June 11, 2019 containing
“future bookings through October” that contained eight hotel reservations around
the country totaling approximately $538,450, for which Ciccone and Platinum
were seeking funds through the sale of additional promissory notes.

15

47. On July 1, 2020, Ciccone sent Sales Agent 1 an email advising him
that the “$220,000 [raised] last week covered three full events in July and is
leaving a balance for the large Maui July Booking of $22,700.00 which is needed
immediately.  The other immediate booking starting August 1st, also in Maui, is
for $192,000.00 which was raised from the original number because they requested
to add some more rooms.”
48. The information in the emails about Platinum’s business and the hotel
bookings was false and material to investors.
49. Ciccone, as the sole owner, managing member, and president of
Platinum and the person with sole control over the Platinum, knew or was reckless
in not knowing, and should have known, that this information about the hotel
bookings was false.
50. Ciccone communicated the false information about the “bookings” to
Sales Agent 1 with the knowledge and expectation that Sales Agent 1 would use
this information in the offer and sale of the Platinum Promissory Notes.
51. Sales Agent 1 used the false and misleading information supplied by
Ciccone and Platinum in the offer and sale of the Platinum Promissory Notes.
B. Misstatements Concerning Use of Investor Funds

52. Ciccone and Platinum made material misrepresentations regarding the
use of investor funds.

16

53. Throughout the Relevant Period, Ciccone and Platinum told
prospective investors and Sales Agent 1 that they would use investor funds raised
from the sale of the promissory notes to enter into arrangements for luxury travel
for which Platinum would receive lucrative payments.  They did not disclose that
Ciccone intended to misappropriate the money and use the money to make Ponzi-
like payments.
54. Ciccone’s and Platinum’s false and misleading statements included
the following:
a. In or about July 2018, in connection with the offer and sale of a
Ciccone Promissory Note, Ciccone told Investor 1 orally and in an
email that Ciccone needed to borrow $100,000 in order to pay a
national hotel in connection with Platinum’s contract with the hotel,
and that Ciccone would restructure his contract with the hotel after he
regained access to his assets restricted by court proceedings.
b. In or about November 2018, Ciccone told Investor 2 that Ciccone
needed to raise money through the sale of Ciccone Promissory Notes
to secure reservations with hotels.  Ciccone communicated this
information to Investor 2 with the knowledge and expectation that
Investor 2 would use this information in the offer and sale of the
Ciccone Promissory Notes to investors.  Investor 2 used the false and

17

misleading information supplied by Ciccone and Platinum in the offer
and sale of Ciccone Promissory Notes.  Based on Ciccone’s false
statements, Investors 2, 3, and 4 together purchased a Ciccone
Promissory Note on or about December 19, 2018, and Investor 5
purchased a Ciccone Promissory Note on or about January 23, 2019.
c. On or about January 12, 2019, Ciccone spoke with Investor 4
requesting that he enter into a second promissory note for $50,000 to
secure reservations at a particular hotel, and sent an email containing a
proposal for hotel reservations at a particular hotel scheduled for late
January 2019; and Ciccone represented that the funds were to be used
to facilitate Platinum entering into an arrangement with the hotel,
which would pay a $90,000 commission, and offered to pay Investor 4
either 25% of the commission or $20,000.
55. As detailed above in paragraphs 45 through 47, Ciccone also made
numerous statements to Sales Agent 1 about specific travel business opportunities
with the intention, expectation, and knowledge that Sales Agent 1 would pass
along that false and misleading information in the solicitation of investors to
purchase Platinum Promissory Notes.
56. A reasonable investor would have understood from these statements
that their money would be used in Platinum’s luxury travel business.  A reasonable

18

investor would not have understood from these statements that Platinum did not
earn sufficient income from its business to repay the promissory notes or that
Ciccone would misappropriate the money and use it to make Ponzi-like payments.
57. These statements regarding the use of investor funds were false and
misleading when made because Ciccone and Platinum did not use investor funds to
secure the travel arrangements as represented and the business arrangements
claimed by Ciccone did not exist.
58. Ciccone and Platinum omitted to state material facts that were
necessary to render their statements regarding the use of investor funds not
misleading.  These omissions include that Platinum did not earn sufficient income
to repay the promissory notes, and that Ciccone intended to misappropriate the
money and use the money to make Ponzi-like payments.
59. These statements regarding the use of investor funds were false and
misleading when made, and Ciccone and Platinum knew or were reckless in not
knowing, and should have known, that the statements regarding the use of investor
funds were false and misleading.  Ciccone, as the sole owner, managing member,
and president of Platinum and the person with sole control over the Platinum bank
accounts, knew the true use of investor funds.
60. The false and misleading statements regarding the use of investor
funds were material to investors.  A reasonable investor would want to know that,

19

rather than using the funds as promised for legitimate business purposes, Ciccone
intended to misappropriate the money and use it to make Ponzi-like payments.
C. Misstatements Concerning Platinum’s Business and Ability to Timely
Make Payments

61. Ciccone and Platinum made material misrepresentations regarding
Platinum’s success and its ability to make timely payments.
62. Throughout the Relevant Period, Ciccone and Platinum represented
that Platinum was a successful business.  These statements were misleading
because Defendants did not disclose that Platinum had very limited luxury travel
reservation business and had not made timely payment on promissory notes.
63. Between July 2018 and January 2019, Ciccone represented to Investor
1, Investor 2, and Investor 4 that Platinum was a successful business and therefore
was able to repay the promissory notes with income from its operations.
64. Ciccone did not disclose to Investor 2 or Investor 4   that starting on or
about October 15, 2018, Ciccone had failed to pay principal and interest due on
two of the Ciccone Promissory Notes sold to Investor 1 because Platinum did not
earn sufficient profits.
65. In or about May 2019, Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 that Platinum was a
successful business and that loans were to be repaid from the profits earned from
the resale of room reservations with the expectation and knowledge that Sales

20

Agent 1 would pass along that false and misleading information in the solicitation
of investors to purchase Platinum Promissory Notes.
66.  Ciccone and Platinum provided Sales Agent 1 with the marketing
deck that described Platinum as a successful business.
67. Ciccone’s descriptions of Platinum’s business to Sales Agent 1 that
Sales Agent 1 then passed on to investors were misleading because Ciccone did not
disclose that starting on or about March 31, 2019, Platinum had very limited luxury
travel reservation business, which resulted in Ciccone failing to pay principal and
interest due on all of the Ciccone Promissory Notes.  These misrepresentations
continued until the end of the Relevant Period.
68. A reasonable investor would have understood from these
representations that Platinum had a viable and successful business model that
would allow it to repay the promissory notes.  A reasonable investor would not
have understood from these communications that Platinum did not have a
sufficient income from business to repay the notes and, in fact, already had past
due promissory notes as of March 31, 2019.
69. These statements regarding Platinum’s successful business and its
ability to make timely payments were false and misleading because Platinum did
not have a successful business that would allow it to repay the promissory notes

21

and, in fact, Ciccone had past due promissory notes as of March 31, 2019 that he
was unable to repay.
70. These statements regarding Platinum’s business and resulting ability
to make timely payments was false and misleading when made, and Ciccone and
Platinum knew or were reckless in not knowing, and should have known, that the
statements regarding Platinum’s success and its ability to make timely payments
were false and misleading.  Ciccone, as the sole owner, managing member, and
president of Platinum and the person with sole control over the Platinum bank
accounts, knew the true state of Platinum’s business and its default on previous
promissory notes.
71. The false and misleading statements regarding Platinum’s business
and ability to make timely payments were material to investors.  A reasonable
investor would want to know whether the borrower will have the ability to make
timely payment.
D. Misstatements Concerning Ciccone’s Ability to Enter into Promissory
Notes.

72. Ciccone and Platinum made material misrepresentations regarding
Ciccone’s ability to enter into promissory notes.
73. Throughout the Relevant Period, Ciccone and Platinum made
statements about entering into lending arrangements but did not disclose that
Ciccone was legally prohibited from entering into such lending arrangements.

22

74. The Ciccone Promissory Notes and Platinum Promissory Notes
represented that the Borrower agreed to pay certain principal and interest on an
agreed date.
75. As detailed above, in or about yMay 2019 and continuing through
October 2019, Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 that Platinum and Ciccone desired to
borrow money for its luxury travel business and would repay the principal and
interest from the profits of the business, with the intention, expectation, and
knowledge that Sales Agent 1 would pass along that false and misleading
information in the solicitation of investors to purchase Platinum Promissory Notes.
76. A reasonable investor would have understood from these statements
that Ciccone was permitted to enter into lending arrangements.
77. These statements regarding Ciccone’s ability to enter into promissory
notes were false and misleading because due to a prior felony criminal conviction
and resulting conditions of supervised release from prison, Ciccone was prohibited
from entering into loan agreements without prior approval of his probation officer,
and he had not requested approval of these transactions.
78. On or about May 12, 2014, Ciccone pleaded guilty to, and was
convicted of one count of mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 and one count of
filing a false income tax return under 26 U.S.C. § 7206 in United States v.
Ciccone, No. 2:2011cr554 (D.N.J. May 12, 2014).

23

79. As part of the criminal judgment entered against him, Ciccone was
sentenced to serve 36 months in prison, and upon release from imprisonment
placed on supervised release for three years.  The terms for Ciccone’s supervised
release contained special conditions including that Ciccone was “prohibited from
incurring any new credit charges, . . . or incurring any new monetary loan,
obligation, or debt, by whatever name known, without approval of the U.S.
Probation Office,” and to “refrain from seeking or holding employment in any
position which involves fund raising. . . .”
80. On or about March 16, 2017, Ciccone was released from prison.  The
special conditions of his supervised release remained in place from March 16, 2017
until March 3, 2021 when his supervised release was terminated.
81. Ciccone did not seek approval from his U.S. Probation Office for any
of the monetary loans, obligations, or debts, or the sale of the securities (i.e., the
promissory notes) described in this Complaint.
82. Ciccone and Platinum omitted to state material facts that were
necessary to render their statements regarding Ciccone’s ability to enter into
promissory notes not misleading.  These omissions include that Ciccone was
legally prohibited from entering into such lending arrangements.
83. These statements regarding Ciccone’s ability to enter into promissory
notes were false and misleading when made, and Ciccone and Platinum knew or

24

were reckless in not knowing, and should have known, that the statements were
false and misleading.  Ciccone was aware of the terms of his supervised release
from prison.
84. The false and misleading statements regarding Ciccone’s ability to
enter into promissory notes were material to investors.  A reasonable investor
would want to know that a person to whom it is lending money is legally
prohibited from entering into lending arrangements due to a prior felony criminal
conviction.
E. Misstatements Concerning Collateral for the Promissory Notes

85. Ciccone and Platinum made material misrepresentations regarding the
collateral for the promissory notes.
86. Throughout the Relevant Period, Ciccone and Platinum represented
that the Platinum Promissory Notes were secured by certain collateral, but did not
disclose that certain of the collateral was pledged on multiple promissory notes and
that Ciccone did not own the other claimed collateral.
87. Between May 15, 2019 and October 8, 2019, Ciccone and Platinum
represented in each of the Platinum Promissory Notes that the “Note is secured by
the borrower’s personal net worth and assets ... including [a] 2016 BMW ... and
[a] Certificate of Title [to] property located at ... Mahogany Cove San Diego,
CA....”

25

88. A reasonable investor would have understood from these
representations that its investment was secured by a luxury car and real property
owned by Ciccone.  A reasonable investor would not have understood that the
luxury car had been previously pledged as collateral or that Ciccone did not own
the claimed real property.
89. These statements regarding the collateral for the promissory notes
were false and misleading because the 2016 BMW was purchased for
approximately $54,000 and was pledged as collateral for several promissory notes
that exceeded its value, and Ciccone did not own the property at Mahogany Cove,
San Diego, California.
90. Ciccone and Platinum omitted to state material facts that were
necessary to render their statements regarding the collateral for the promissory
notes not misleading.  These omissions include that the 2016 BMW was purchased
for approximately $54,000 and was pledged as collateral for several promissory
notes that exceeded its value and that Ciccone did not own the property at
Mahogany Cove, San Diego, California.
91. These statements regarding the collateral for the promissory notes
were false and misleading when made, and Ciccone and Platinum knew or were
reckless in not knowing, and should have known, that the statements regarding the
collateral for the promissory notes were false and misleading.  Ciccone, as the sole

26

owner, managing member, and president of Platinum was aware that the BMW had
been pledged as collateral for several promissory notes that exceeded its value and
that he did not own the property that was pledged as collateral in the promissory
notes.
92. The false and misleading statements regarding the collateral for the
promissory notes were material to investors.  A reasonable investor would want to
know that the collateral pledged would not provide security for its investment.
F. Misstatements to Existing Investors Concerning Delays in Making
Payment

93. During August 2019, Ciccone made a series of false statements,
including fabricating documents, to explain why payments due under the
promissory notes were not being timely made.
94. During August 2019, Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 in telephone
conversations, emails, and text messages that Platinum Enterprise’s bank was
holding deposits from a hotel, with which Platinum was purportedly doing
business, and the funds would be wired to investors in five days as repayment on
their outstanding Platinum Promissory Notes.
95. On or about August 19, 2019, Ciccone forwarded a fabricated email to
Sales Agent 1. The fabricated email purported to be an email from a bank
employee verifying bank accounts held a total balance of $167,988 and stating the
wire transfers to investors were still on hold.  On or about August 19, 2019,

27

Platinum and Platinum Enterprises did not possess $167,988 in    their bank
accounts.
96. On or about August 27, 2019, based upon the false information
provided by Ciccone, Sales Agent 1 drafted a letter, which Ciccone reviewed and
signed.  In the letter, Ciccone and Platinum falsely represented that delays in
payments to the investors were caused by Platinum opening a new bank account
and the hotel cancelling the checks it had issued to Platinum.  Ciccone directed
Sales Agent 1 to send the letter to investors.  Sales Agent 1 sent the letter to five
investors to whom payment was due.  A reasonable investor would have
understood from these communications that the delay in making payment under
existing promissory notes was caused by the reasons Ciccone provided and that
these were problems that could be overcome and were not fundamental to
Platinum’s business.
97. These statements regarding the reasons for Platinum’s failure to make
timely payments were false and misleading because there was no issue with the
bank.  Rather, Platinum did not have the necessary money to make the payments.
98. Ciccone and Platinum omitted to state material facts that were
necessary to render their statements regarding Platinum’s failure to make timely
payment not misleading.  These omissions include that Platinum did not have the
funds to make payment as required.

28

99. These statements regarding Platinum’s failure to make timely
payment were false and misleading when made, and Ciccone and Platinum knew
or were reckless in not knowing, and should have known, that the statements
regarding Platinum’s failure to make timely payment were false and misleading.
Ciccone, as the sole owner, managing member, and president of Platinum and the
person with sole control over the Platinum bank accounts, knew that there was no
issue with the bank but, rather, Platinum did not have the necessary money to make
payment.
100. The false and misleading statements regarding Platinum’s failure to
make timely payment were material to investors.  A reasonable investor would
want to know the true cause for the delay in making payment.
101. After receiving this false and misleading information about Ciccone’s
purported problems with the bank, two investors purchased additional Platinum
Promissory Notes during September and October 2019.
IV. Ciccone Engaged in Deceptive Lulling Conduct.

102. Ciccone made false and misleading statements to investors through
Sales Agent 1 to prevent the investors from learning that Platinum would not be
able to make payments as promised in the Platinum Promissory Notes.  Ciccone
provided this information to Sales Agent 1 with the knowledge and expectation

29

that Sales Agent 1 would provide that information to investors to delay their
demands for repayment.
103. First, as described above, Ciccone made false statements regarding the
delay in making payment in August 2019.
104. Second, through the late summer and fall of 2019, Ciccone made
repeated statements to Sales Agent 1 about why payments to investors were
delayed, including representing that a bank had frozen certain funds and that
Ciccone was appearing before a court to obtain an order to unfreeze these funds.
105. These statements about court actions were false and misleading
because Ciccone filed no lawsuit, did not appear at hearings to release the funds,
and the banks did not hold any funds paid by the hotel or frozen in the accounts.
106. Third, in or about December 2019, Ciccone sent Sales Agent 1 a copy
of his personal financial statement that showed that Ciccone had a net worth of
over $5.5 million from which investors could be repaid.  The financial statement
was false because Ciccone did not have the assets represented.
107. Fourth, in January 2020, Ciccone falsely told Sales Agent 1 that he
personally had substantial assets, but those assets were unavailable to be used to
repay investors due to a court order.
108. On or about January 9, 2020, Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 that Ciccone
owned funds held in a bank account in the name of a family trust that were

30

restricted by a court proceeding, and sent Sales Agent 1 the first page of a bank
statement for the account showing a balance of over $3.3   million as of December
31, 2019.  Ciccone fabricated the bank statement.  In fact, Platinum previously
owned the account, and the account was closed on April 2, 2019 because of
overdrawn funds.
V. In the Alternative, Ciccone Violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act
and Rule 10b-5(b) Thereunder Through or By Means of the Action of
Sales Agent 1.

109. In the alternative to the claim that Ciccone, directly or indirectly,
violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder with
respect to those statements made through Sales Agent 1, Ciccone committed the
violations through the actions of Sales Agent 1 as prohibited by Section 20(b) of
the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(b)].
110. From approximately May through October 2019, Ciccone used Sales
Agent 1 to solicit investors.
111. As detailed above, Ciccone knowingly or recklessly provided false
and misleading information to Sales Agent 1 with the intention, expectation, and
knowledge that Sales Agent 1 would pass along that false and misleading
information in the solicitation of investors to purchase Platinum Promissory Notes.
112. Sales Agent 1 provided the false and misleading information to
investors in connection with the sales of Platinum Promissory Notes.

31

VI. Defendants’ Conduct Was in the Offer, Purchase, and Sale of Securities.

113. The misstatements alleged herein were made by Ciccone and
Platinum to induce investors to purchase Ciccone Promissory Notes and Platinum
Promissory Notes, and as stated herein certain investors did purchase those
promissory notes.
114. Accordingly, Ciccone and Platinum made material misstatements in
the offer or sale of securities and in connection with the purchase or sale of
securities.
VII. Platinum Promissory Notes Were Sold When No Registration Statement
Was in Effect.

115. Sections 5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act   [15 U.S.C. § 77e(a) and (c)]
make it unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, to use interstate commerce
or the mails, to send a security unless a registration statement is in effect as to the
security, or to offer to sell a security unless a registration statement has been filed
as to such security.  A registration statement is transaction specific.  Each offer and
sale of a security must either be made under a registration statement or fall under a
registration exemption.
116. As detailed above, from May to October 2019, Ciccone and Platinum,
directly or indirectly through the acts of Sales Agent 1, offered and sold securities
in the form of Platinum Promissory Notes to at least seventeen investors and
obtained approximately $1,022,680.

32

117. Ciccone was a necessary participant and substantial factor in the
securities offerings identified above.  Among other things, Ciccone as the sole
owner, managing member, and president of Platinum arranged the offering of
Platinum Promissory Notes, signed the Platinum Promissory Notes, and made the
statements to induce investors to purchase the Platinum Promissory Notes.  As
such, Ciccone’s actions were integral to the success of the offering.
118. No registration statement was filed or in effect with the SEC for the
offers and sales of the Platinum Promissory Notes.
119. No exemption from registration existed with respect to the offering.
120. Ciccone and Platinum offered and sold securities using the means or
instruments of interstate commerce, including, but not limited to, telephone, email,
and wire transfers.
VIII. Relief Defendant Platinum Enterprises Received Proceeds from
Defendants’ Fraud to Which It Has No Legitimate Claim.

121. As alleged above in paragraph 22, Relief Defendant Platinum
Enterprises received proceeds from Defendants’ fraud for which it   provided no
reciprocal goods or services, and to which it has no legitimate claim.  As a result,
those funds should be returned to defrauded investors.

33

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Fraud—Section 10(b) of the Exchange and Rule 10b-5 Thereunder
(Both Defendants)

122. The SEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1
through 121   as though fully set forth herein.
123. By virtue of the foregoing, Ciccone and Platinum, directly or
indirectly, acting with scienter, by use of the means or instrumentalities of
interstate commerce, or of the mails, or of a facility of a national securities
exchange, in connection with the purchase or sale of a security: (a) employed
devices, schemes or artifices to defraud; (b) made untrue statements of material
fact or omitted 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 (c) engaged in acts, practices or courses of business which operated or would
operate as a fraud or deceit upon another person.
124. By reason of the conduct described above, Ciccone and Platinum,
directly or indirectly, violated, and unless restrained and enjoined, will again
violate, 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(b)].
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Fraud –   Violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b)
Thereunder as Prohibited by Section 20(b) of the Exchange Act
(In the Alternative to Claim 1’s 10b-5(b) Claim with respect to Statements Made
Through Sales Agent 1, Against Defendant Ciccone)

34

125. The SEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1
through 121   as though fully set forth herein.
126. Section 20(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(b)] precludes any
person, directly or indirectly, from doing any act which would be unlawful under
the Exchange Act for such person to do, through or by means of any other person.
127. By knowingly or recklessly using Sales Agent 1 to solicit investors,
providing false and misleading information to Sales Agent 1, with the intent that
Sales Agent 1 use the false and misleading information in connection with the sale
of securities, Ciccone, directly or indirectly, violated Section 20(b) of the
Exchange Act.  These acts, done through and by means of Sales Agent 1, violated
Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder [15 U.S.C. §
78j(b) and 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5(b)].
128. By reason of the conduct described above, Ciccone directly or
indirectly violated, and unless restrained and enjoined, will again violate, Sections
10(b) and 20(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Fraud –   Section 17(a) of the Securities Act
(Both Defendants)
129. The SEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1
through 121   as though fully set forth herein.
130. By virtue of the foregoing, Ciccone and Platinum have, directly or

35

indirectly, in the offer or sale of securities, by use of the means or instruments of
transportation or communication in interstate commerce or by use of the mails, (1)
employed a device, scheme, or artifice to defraud with scienter; (2) obtained
money or property by means of an untrue statement of material fact or omission to
state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, and/or (3) engaged in
transactions, practices or courses of business that operated or would operate as a
fraud or deceit upon the purchasers of such securities.
131. Accordingly, Ciccone and Platinum violated and, unless restrained
and enjoined, will again violate Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §
77q(a)].
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Offer and Sale of Unregistered Securities –   Section 5(a) and (c) of the
Securities Act
(Both Defendants)
132. The SEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1
through 121   as though fully set forth herein.
133. Ciccone and Platinum, directly or indirectly, singly or in concert,
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 caused to be carried through the mails or in interstate
commerce by any means or instruments of transportation, securities for the purpose

36

of sale or for delivery after sale when no registration statement was in effect as to
those securities.
134. Ciccone and Platinum, directly or indirectly, singly or in concert,
made use of the means or instruments of transportation or communication in
interstate commerce or of the mails to offer to sell or offer to buy securities
through the use or medium of a prospectus or otherwise, when no registration
statement had been filed for those securities.
135. Accordingly, Ciccone and Platinum violated and, unless restrained
and enjoined, will again violate Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act [15
U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and 77e(c)].
FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Disgorgement from Relief Defendant –
Section 6501 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021,
Pub. L. No. 116-283 and Equitable Principles
(Relief Defendant Platinum Enterprise)
136. The SEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1
through 121   as though fully set forth herein.
137. Relief Defendant Platinum Enterprises received money as a result of
the violations of the federal securities laws by Ciccone and Platinum, to which
Platinum Enterprises has no legitimate claim.
138. Platinum Enterprises has no legitimate claim to the funds it received
from investors, having obtained the funds under circumstances in which it is not

37

just, equitable or conscionable for Platinum Enterprises to retain the funds, and
therefore it has been unjustly enriched.
139. Platinum Enterprises should be required to disgorge all ill-gotten
funds, along with prejudgment interest, under the equitable doctrines of
disgorgement, unjust enrichment, and constructive trust.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, the SEC respectfully requires that this Court:
I.
Find that the Defendants committed the violations alleged in this Complaint;
II.
Enter an injunction, in a form consistent with Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, permanently restraining and enjoining each of the Defendants from violating,
directly or indirectly, Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§
77e(a), 77e(c), and 77q(a)] and 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]  ; and, in the alternative, Ciccone from
violating Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5(b) as prohibited by Section 20(b) of the Exchange
Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(b)] ;
III.
Enter an injunction permanently restraining and enjoining Ciccone from
participating, directly or indirectly, including, but not limited to, through any entity owned

38

or controlled by him, in the issuance, purchase, offer, or sale of any security, provided,
however, that such injunction shall not prevent Ciccone from purchasing or selling
securities for his own personal accounts;
IV.
Enter an order barring Ciccone from serving as an officer or director of a publicly-
held company pursuant to Section 21(e) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(e)] and
Section 21(d)(2) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(2))];
V.
Order Defendants and Relief Defendants to disgorge all ill-gotten gains, together
with pre-judgment interest, derived from the activities set forth in this Complaint;
VI.
Order Defendants to pay civil money 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)];
VII.
Retain jurisdiction of this action in accordance with the principles of equity and the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in order to implement and carry out the terms of all orders
and decrees that may be entered, or to entertain any suitable application or motion for
additional relief within the jurisdiction of this Court; and

39

VIII.
Grant such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
JURY DEMAND
The SEC demands a trial by jury on all claims so triable.
Dated: September 29, 2021
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Leslie J. Hughes
Leslie J. Hughes, (Colo. Bar No. 15423]
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
1961 Stout Street, Suite 1700
Denver, CO 80294-1961
Telephone: 303-844-1086
Email: [email protected]

    Attorney for Plaintiff
United States Securities and Exchange
Commission

Leslie J. Hughes (Colo. Bar 15042) 
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 
Denver Regional Office 
1961 Stout Street, Suite 1700 
Denver, CO 80294-1961 
Telephone 303-844-1000 
Email: [email protected] 

 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 
 

 
Case No. 21-cv-17768 
 
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 
 
   Plaintiff, 
    
   v. 
 
GREGORY A. CICCONE, and 
PLATINUM TRAVEL AND ENTERTAINMENT, L.L.C., 
 
   Defendants, 
 
PLATINUM ENTERPRISES & CONCIERGE SERVICES, INC., 
 
   Relief Defendant. 

 
__________________________________________________________________ 
 

COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL SECURITIES 
LAWS AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND 

__________________________________________________________________ 
 
 Plaintiff United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), 1961 

Stout Street, Suite 1700, Denver, Colorado 80294, alleges the following for its 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 1 of 39 PageID: 1



2 
 

Complaint against Defendants Gregory A. Ciccone and Platinum Travel and 

Entertainment, L.L.C., and Relief Defendant Platinum Enterprises & Concierge 

Services, Inc., whose last known addresses or principal places of business are set 

forth below: 

Gregory A. Ciccone 
4015 Aspen Grove DR 
Franklin, TN 37067-1424 
 
Platinum Travel and Entertainment, L.L.C. 
23 Dogwood Court 
Woodland Park, NJ 07424 
 
Platinum Enterprises & Concierge Services, Inc.  
4026 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 300 
San Diego, CA 92106 
 

SUMMARY 

1. Defendant Gregory A. Ciccone, a convicted felon acting through his 

company, Defendant Platinum Travel and Entertainment L.L.C. (“Platinum”), 

defrauded investors out of over $1.5 million.      

2. From July 2018 through February 2020 (the “Relevant Period”), 

Ciccone and Platinum offered and sold promissory notes to investors for the 

purported purpose of securing hotel reservations as part of Platinum’s luxury travel 

business.  Ciccone and Platinum told investors that Platinum was a successful 

business that reserved blocks of rooms at luxury hotels and resold the reservations 

at a profit, from which investors would be repaid principal and interest on their 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 2 of 39 PageID: 2



3 
 

notes ranging from 15% to 50% in 45 to 146 days.  Rather than use investor money 

in connection with Platinum’s luxury travel business as he had promised, Ciccone 

misappropriated the vast majority of the money and used much of the remainder to 

make Ponzi-like payments.  Ciccone used investor money to, among other things, 

purchase a luxury car, pay credit cards, and pay for personal travel. 

3. Ciccone initially solicited investors directly and later recruited an 

acquaintance (referred to here as “Sales Agent 1”) to solicit investors in Platinum.  

Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 his phony story about his successful, luxury travel 

business with the knowledge and expectation that Sales Agent 1 would disseminate 

those false and misleading statements to prospective investors.  Ciccone never 

disclosed to investors that he was looting the money raised, that Platinum did not 

have sufficient income from its luxury travel business to repay investors, that due 

to a prior felony criminal conviction he was not permitted to enter into promissory 

notes, or that by March 2019 Platinum was not making timely payment on 

promissory notes that had already come due.   

4. From August through September 2019, Ciccone directed investors 

who purchased promissory notes from Platinum to transfer their funds to bank 

accounts held in the name of Platinum Enterprises & Concierge Services, Inc. 

(“Platinum Enterprises”), an entity he controlled.  Platinum Enterprises provided 

no consideration for receipt of the investors’ funds and was unjustly enriched. 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 3 of 39 PageID: 3



4 
 

5. As a result of the conduct described herein, Ciccone and Platinum 

(referred to together as “Defendants” herein) violated and, unless restrained and 

enjoined, will continue to violate the securities registration and antifraud 

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

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

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

10b-5 thereunder [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5].  Alternatively, Ciccone is liable for 

violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) under Section 

20(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(b)], for activities taken through or by 

means of Sales Agent 1, whom he enlisted to solicit investors. 

NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AND REQUESTED RELIEF 

6. The SEC brings this action pursuant to authority conferred on it by 

Section 20(b) and (d) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77t(b) and (d)] and 

Section 21(d) and (e) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 78u(d) and (e)]. 

7. The SEC seeks entry of permanent injunctions; disgorgement of ill-

gotten gains derived from the conduct alleged in the Complaint plus prejudgment 

interest thereon [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(7)]; 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)]; an order prohibiting Ciccone, directly or indirectly, 

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

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 4 of 39 PageID: 4



5 
 

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

however, that such injunction shall not prevent Ciccone from purchasing or selling 

securities for his own personal accounts; an order barring Ciccone from serving as 

an officer or director of a public company; an order directing Platinum Enterprises 

to disgorge its ill-gotten gains with prejudgment interest; and such other relief that 

the court may deem appropriate. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

8. The court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Sections 20(b), 

20(d)(1), and 22(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77t(b), 77t(d)(1), and 

77v(a)], and Sections 21(d)(1), 21(e), and 27(a) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 

78u(d)(1), 78u(e), and 78aa(a)].   

9. In connection with the conduct alleged in the Complaint, Defendants, 

directly or indirectly, made use of the means or instruments of transportation or 

communication in interstate commerce, the means or instrumentalities of interstate 

commerce, or of the mails, in connection with the acts, practices, and courses of 

business set forth in this Complaint.  Defendants used emails, text messages and 

the Internet to conduct their fraudulent activities, and caused wire transfers of 

funds to be made and received through communications in interstate commerce.   

10. Venue lies in the District of New Jersey pursuant to Section 22(a) of 

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

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 5 of 39 PageID: 5



6 
 

U.S.C. § 78aa(a)].  Platinum maintains its principal place of business in this 

judicial district.  Ciccone and Platinum engaged in certain of the acts, practices, 

transactions, and courses of business alleged in this Complaint within the District 

of New Jersey, including, but not limited to, the offer and sales of promissory notes 

to an investor who resides in New Jersey, and directing investors to send wire 

transfers for the purchase of promissory notes, which transfers were effected in this 

District. 

DEFENDANTS AND RELIEF DEFENDANT 

11. Defendant Gregory A. Ciccone, age 44, transacted business and 

offered and sold securities while he resided in Little Falls, New Jersey from 

approximately 2017 through November 2018, and resided in San Diego, California 

from approximately November 2018 through at least February 2020. Ciccone’s last 

known address is in Franklin, Tennessee.  

12. Defendant Platinum Travel and Entertainment L.L.C. is a New 

Jersey limited liability company with its principal place of business in Woodland 

Park, New Jersey from approximately 2017 through November 2018, and in San 

Diego, California from approximately November 2018 through at least February 

2020.  Ciccone is the sole owner, managing member, and president of Platinum.       

13. Relief Defendant Platinum Enterprises & Concierge Services, Inc. 

is a California corporation with its principal place of business in San Diego, 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 6 of 39 PageID: 6



7 
 

California.  Ciccone is the sole owner and chief executive officer of Platinum 

Enterprises.  

FACTS 

I. Defendants Raised Money From Investors Through the Offer and Sale 
of Securities. 
 
14. From approximately July 2018 through February 2020, Ciccone and 

Platinum solicited money from, and offered and sold securities in the form of 

short-term, high-interest promissory notes to, investors.  Ciccone elicited the help 

of Sales Agent 1 starting in May 2019, who, working at the direction of Ciccone 

and on behalf of Platinum, also solicited and offered and sold securities to 

investors.  Collectively, they raised approximately $1.5 million from at least 22 

investors.  

15. From approximately July 2018 through February 2020, Ciccone 

offered and sold, directly or indirectly, short-term, high-interest promissory notes 

(the “Ciccone Promissory Notes”).  Ciccone personally solicited investors, at least 

one of whom also solicited others based upon the information provided by 

Ciccone.  Ciccone ultimately raised $491,271 from at least five investors. 

16. Beginning in approximately May 2019 and lasting through at least 

October 2019, Ciccone and Platinum offered and sold, directly or indirectly, short-

term, high-interest promissory notes (the “Platinum Promissory Notes”) through 

Sales Agent 1.  Ciccone provided information to Sales Agent 1 who, at Ciccone’s 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 7 of 39 PageID: 7



8 
 

direction and on behalf of Platinum, solicited at least 17 investors and raised over 

$1 million from those investors. 

17. The Ciccone Promissory Notes and the Platinum Promissory Notes 

had terms that varied from 45 to 146 days, and paid interest ranging from 15% to 

50% per term.  Ciccone signed the Ciccone Promissory Notes individually.  

Ciccone signed the Platinum Promissory Notes individually and as the managing 

member of Platinum.  Investors in both promissory notes believed, based on 

Ciccone’s and Sales Agent 1’s representations, that their money would be used for 

the same purpose – to reserve blocks of rooms at luxury hotels whose reservations 

would be resold at a profit.    

18. Section 2(a)(1) of the Securities Act and Section 3(a)(10) of the 

Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 77b(a)(1) and 78c(a)(10)] define “security” to 

include, among other things, any “note.”   

19. The Ciccone Promissory Notes and the Platinum Promissory Notes 

are securities in the form of “notes.” 

20. The Ciccone Promissory Notes and Platinum Promissory Notes are 

securities because: (i) Ciccone and Platinum entered into the promissory notes to 

finance Platinum’s purported luxury travel business; (ii) the investors were 

primarily motivated by the high interest rate payable under the promissory notes 

and did not enter into the promissory notes for any consumer purpose; and (iii) 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 8 of 39 PageID: 8



9 
 

investors viewed the promissory notes as investments with guaranteed returns of 

between 15 and 50 percent during the terms of the respective promissory notes. 

21. Ciccone directed investors to wire the funds for the purchase of 

Ciccone Promissory Notes or Platinum Promissory Notes to Platinum’s or 

Platinum Enterprises’ bank accounts.   

22. While the majority of the money was sent to Platinum’s bank 

accounts, from August through October 2019, Ciccone directed various investors 

to send payment for the purchase of Platinum Promissory Notes to Platinum 

Enterprises’ bank accounts.  Over $309,000 of investor funds was deposited in 

Platinum Enterprises’ bank accounts.  Platinum Enterprises did not provide any 

consideration for receipt of this money. 

23. Ciccone was the only authorized signatory and had sole control over 

both Platinum’s and Platinum Enterprises’ bank accounts.   

II. Defendants Misappropriated and Misused Investor Money, and 
Engaged in Other Deceptive Conduct. 
 
24. During the Relevant Period, Defendants engaged in deceptive conduct 

to defraud investors, and engaged in numerous acts, practices, and courses of 

business that defrauded the investors.   

25. Ciccone and Sales Agent 1 solicited investors through one-on-one oral 

and written communications.  To raise money from investors through the sale of 

Platinum Promissory Notes, Ciccone provided Sales Agent 1 a “marketing deck,” 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 9 of 39 PageID: 9



10 
 

which was used by Sales Agent 1 in the solicitation.  The marketing deck described 

Platinum as a “luxury travel concierge” with “unique relationships” that allowed it 

to provide high-end experiences to its clients. The marketing deck also described 

the services that Platinum offered and provided information on the background of 

the company and its target market. 

26. Ciccone, Platinum, and Sales Agent 1, working at the direction of 

Ciccone and on behalf of Platinum, told investors that Platinum would use investor 

funds to pay advance deposits to reserve luxury travel for Platinum’s clients, and 

that Platinum earned money based on fees it received from hotels and others in 

connection with its luxury travel concierge business.   

27. Contrary to the representations regarding the intended use of 

proceeds, most investor funds raised were not used to secure the hotel reservations 

as represented.  Instead, Ciccone misappropriated or misused virtually all of the 

investor funds raised. 

28. First, Ciccone misappropriated approximately $1.3 million of investor 

funds.  Ciccone used the money to pay for various personal expenses, including 

approximately:  $54,330 to purchase a BMW automobile; another $235,000 to pay 

for clothes, wine, and other personal items; and $329,000 was withdrawn in cash.  

Ciccone and Platinum did not disclose that Ciccone would use investor funds for 

personal expenses. 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 10 of 39 PageID: 10



11 
 

29. Second, Ciccone and Platinum used approximately $139,000 of 

investor funds to make Ponzi-like payments to earlier investors with overdue notes.   

30. Platinum did not earn sufficient profits from the travel concierge 

business to repay the principal and interest accrued on the promissory notes as they 

became due.  Accordingly, as promissory notes became due, in certain cases, 

Ciccone and Platinum made interest and principal payments with new investor 

money. 

31. For example, on or about July 24, 2019, Ciccone and Platinum 

obtained approximately $200,000 from the sale of Platinum Promissory Notes.  On 

or about August 1, 2019, Ciccone and Platinum used this new investor money to 

make Ponzi-like payments of $32,000 and $47,672.69 to two investors whose 

promissory notes were due.  

32. Third, Ciccone and Platinum paid Sales Agent 1 approximately 

$16,000 out of funds received from investors.  These payments were not disclosed 

to investors. 

33. Ciccone also engaged in deceptive conduct by fabricating documents 

and providing them to investors in order to delay investors’ requests for overdue 

payments of principal and interest.  For example, Ciccone provided investors with 

a fabricated August 2019 email purportedly from a bank employee, his personal 

financial statement, and a bank statement for a family trust account, as discussed 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 11 of 39 PageID: 11



12 
 

below in paragraphs 102 through 108.  

34. In addition to the deceptive conduct described above, Defendants also 

made numerous other material misrepresentations and omissions to investors as 

detailed below.   

35. In engaging in the fraudulent and deceptive conduct, Ciccone, as the 

managing member, sole owner, and president of Platinum, acted as an agent of 

Platinum and his scienter and conduct is imputed to Platinum.   

36. In connection with each fraudulent practice, Defendants knew or were 

reckless in not knowing, and should have known, that they were engaging in 

fraudulent and deceptive conduct.  Defendants had full knowledge of and control 

over Platinum’s and Platinum Enterprises’ bank accounts and the uses of investor 

funds, the creation and dissemination of fabricated documents, as well as the 

material misrepresentations and omissions made to investors.   

III. In Connection with the Offering of Securities, Ciccone and Platinum 
Made Material Misstatements and Omissions. 
 
37. Throughout the Relevant Period, in the offer and sale of the 

promissory notes, Ciccone and Platinum made numerous false and misleading 

statements and omissions of material facts, both orally and in electronic 

communications, about the nature and success of Platinum’s business operations. 

38. Ciccone determined the content of and had ultimate authority over his 

statements and any written materials used to solicit prospective Platinum investors, 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 12 of 39 PageID: 12



13 
 

including the documents provided to Sales Agent 1. 

39. Ciccone, as the managing member, sole owner, and president of 

Platinum, made the false statements and omissions and distributed documents as an 

agent of Platinum.  Ciccone’s statements and scienter are imputed to Platinum. 

A. Ciccone and Platinum Made Material Misstatements and Omissions to 
Sales Agent 1 With the Knowledge and Expectation that He Would 
Provide the Information to Investors to Solicit the Purchase of 
Promissory Notes.    
 

40. In or about April 2019, Ciccone was introduced to Sales Agent 1 by a 

mutual acquaintance.  Ciccone requested that Sales Agent 1 solicit investors in 

connection with the Platinum Promissory Notes. 

41. In a phone call in April 2019 and in later conversations, Ciccone told 

Sales Agent 1 that Platinum and Ciccone operated a successful, high-end luxury 

travel concierge business that reserved blocks of rooms at luxury hotels, which 

they resold at a profit.  Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 that Platinum and Ciccone 

wanted to raise approximately $450,000 through the sale of promissory notes to 

secure hotel room reservations, and the loans were to be repaid from the profits 

earned from the resale of the room reservations. 

42. This information was false.  As of the time of this communication, 

Ciccone and Platinum had prior overdue promissory notes that they were unable to 

pay.  Moreover, due to a prior criminal conviction and resulting conditions of 

supervised release, Ciccone was prohibited from entering into loan agreements 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 13 of 39 PageID: 13



14 
 

without prior approval of his probation officer, approval that he had not requested 

nor received. 

43. On April 24, 2019, Ciccone sent an email to Sales Agent 1 confirming 

his telephone conversation with Sales Agent 1 and included the “marketing deck,” 

described above in paragraph 25, which provided information about Platinum’s 

successful business.  

44. Starting in May 2019, Ciccone sent Sales Agent 1 a series of emails 

describing various hotel reservations that Platinum purportedly held, for which 

Ciccone was seeking funding through the sale of Platinum Promissory Notes.   

45. On May 13, 2019, Ciccone sent Sales Agent 1 an email containing a 

list of Platinum’s “immediate bookings,” including a reservation for $24,000 at 

Punta Mita, Mexico and other reservations totaling $211,000 at hotels through June 

2019.  Ciccone requested Sales Agent 1 solicit investors to purchase Platinum 

Promissory Notes so Platinum could pay for these “bookings.”  Ciccone wrote that 

the loans would be repaid “on a 60 day payment schedule from the check-out date” 

on the reservation.   

46. Ciccone sent Sales Agent 1 an email on June 11, 2019 containing 

“future bookings through October” that contained eight hotel reservations around 

the country totaling approximately $538,450, for which Ciccone and Platinum 

were seeking funds through the sale of additional promissory notes.   

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 14 of 39 PageID: 14



15 
 

47. On July 1, 2020, Ciccone sent Sales Agent 1 an email advising him 

that the “$220,000 [raised] last week covered three full events in July and is 

leaving a balance for the large Maui July Booking of $22,700.00 which is needed 

immediately.  The other immediate booking starting August 1st, also in Maui, is 

for $192,000.00 which was raised from the original number because they requested 

to add some more rooms.”   

48. The information in the emails about Platinum’s business and the hotel 

bookings was false and material to investors.   

49. Ciccone, as the sole owner, managing member, and president of 

Platinum and the person with sole control over the Platinum, knew or was reckless 

in not knowing, and should have known, that this information about the hotel 

bookings was false. 

50. Ciccone communicated the false information about the “bookings” to 

Sales Agent 1 with the knowledge and expectation that Sales Agent 1 would use 

this information in the offer and sale of the Platinum Promissory Notes.   

51. Sales Agent 1 used the false and misleading information supplied by 

Ciccone and Platinum in the offer and sale of the Platinum Promissory Notes. 

B. Misstatements Concerning Use of Investor Funds 
 

52. Ciccone and Platinum made material misrepresentations regarding the 

use of investor funds.   

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 15 of 39 PageID: 15



16 
 

53. Throughout the Relevant Period, Ciccone and Platinum told 

prospective investors and Sales Agent 1 that they would use investor funds raised 

from the sale of the promissory notes to enter into arrangements for luxury travel 

for which Platinum would receive lucrative payments.  They did not disclose that 

Ciccone intended to misappropriate the money and use the money to make Ponzi-

like payments.   

54. Ciccone’s and Platinum’s false and misleading statements included 

the following:  

a. In or about July 2018, in connection with the offer and sale of a 

Ciccone Promissory Note, Ciccone told Investor 1 orally and in an 

email that Ciccone needed to borrow $100,000 in order to pay a 

national hotel in connection with Platinum’s contract with the hotel, 

and that Ciccone would restructure his contract with the hotel after he 

regained access to his assets restricted by court proceedings. 

b. In or about November 2018, Ciccone told Investor 2 that Ciccone 

needed to raise money through the sale of Ciccone Promissory Notes 

to secure reservations with hotels.  Ciccone communicated this 

information to Investor 2 with the knowledge and expectation that 

Investor 2 would use this information in the offer and sale of the 

Ciccone Promissory Notes to investors.  Investor 2 used the false and 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 16 of 39 PageID: 16



17 
 

misleading information supplied by Ciccone and Platinum in the offer 

and sale of Ciccone Promissory Notes.  Based on Ciccone’s false 

statements, Investors 2, 3, and 4 together purchased a Ciccone 

Promissory Note on or about December 19, 2018, and Investor 5 

purchased a Ciccone Promissory Note on or about January 23, 2019. 

c. On or about January 12, 2019, Ciccone spoke with Investor 4 

requesting that he enter into a second promissory note for $50,000 to 

secure reservations at a particular hotel, and sent an email containing a 

proposal for hotel reservations at a particular hotel scheduled for late 

January 2019; and Ciccone represented that the funds were to be used 

to facilitate Platinum entering into an arrangement with the hotel, 

which would pay a $90,000 commission, and offered to pay Investor 4 

either 25% of the commission or $20,000. 

55. As detailed above in paragraphs 45 through 47, Ciccone also made 

numerous statements to Sales Agent 1 about specific travel business opportunities 

with the intention, expectation, and knowledge that Sales Agent 1 would pass 

along that false and misleading information in the solicitation of investors to 

purchase Platinum Promissory Notes. 

56. A reasonable investor would have understood from these statements 

that their money would be used in Platinum’s luxury travel business.  A reasonable 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 17 of 39 PageID: 17



18 
 

investor would not have understood from these statements that Platinum did not 

earn sufficient income from its business to repay the promissory notes or that 

Ciccone would misappropriate the money and use it to make Ponzi-like payments. 

57. These statements regarding the use of investor funds were false and 

misleading when made because Ciccone and Platinum did not use investor funds to 

secure the travel arrangements as represented and the business arrangements 

claimed by Ciccone did not exist. 

58. Ciccone and Platinum omitted to state material facts that were 

necessary to render their statements regarding the use of investor funds not 

misleading.  These omissions include that Platinum did not earn sufficient income 

to repay the promissory notes, and that Ciccone intended to misappropriate the 

money and use the money to make Ponzi-like payments. 

59. These statements regarding the use of investor funds were false and 

misleading when made, and Ciccone and Platinum knew or were reckless in not 

knowing, and should have known, that the statements regarding the use of investor 

funds were false and misleading.  Ciccone, as the sole owner, managing member, 

and president of Platinum and the person with sole control over the Platinum bank 

accounts, knew the true use of investor funds.   

60. The false and misleading statements regarding the use of investor 

funds were material to investors.  A reasonable investor would want to know that, 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 18 of 39 PageID: 18



19 
 

rather than using the funds as promised for legitimate business purposes, Ciccone 

intended to misappropriate the money and use it to make Ponzi-like payments. 

C. Misstatements Concerning Platinum’s Business and Ability to Timely 
Make Payments 
 

61. Ciccone and Platinum made material misrepresentations regarding 

Platinum’s success and its ability to make timely payments. 

62. Throughout the Relevant Period, Ciccone and Platinum represented 

that Platinum was a successful business.  These statements were misleading 

because Defendants did not disclose that Platinum had very limited luxury travel 

reservation business and had not made timely payment on promissory notes.   

63. Between July 2018 and January 2019, Ciccone represented to Investor 

1, Investor 2, and Investor 4 that Platinum was a successful business and therefore 

was able to repay the promissory notes with income from its operations. 

64. Ciccone did not disclose to Investor 2 or Investor 4 that starting on or 

about October 15, 2018, Ciccone had failed to pay principal and interest due on 

two of the Ciccone Promissory Notes sold to Investor 1 because Platinum did not 

earn sufficient profits. 

65. In or about May 2019, Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 that Platinum was a 

successful business and that loans were to be repaid from the profits earned from 

the resale of room reservations with the expectation and knowledge that Sales 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 19 of 39 PageID: 19



20 
 

Agent 1 would pass along that false and misleading information in the solicitation 

of investors to purchase Platinum Promissory Notes. 

66.  Ciccone and Platinum provided Sales Agent 1 with the marketing 

deck that described Platinum as a successful business. 

67. Ciccone’s descriptions of Platinum’s business to Sales Agent 1 that 

Sales Agent 1 then passed on to investors were misleading because Ciccone did not 

disclose that starting on or about March 31, 2019, Platinum had very limited luxury 

travel reservation business, which resulted in Ciccone failing to pay principal and 

interest due on all of the Ciccone Promissory Notes.  These misrepresentations 

continued until the end of the Relevant Period.  

68. A reasonable investor would have understood from these 

representations that Platinum had a viable and successful business model that 

would allow it to repay the promissory notes.  A reasonable investor would not 

have understood from these communications that Platinum did not have a 

sufficient income from business to repay the notes and, in fact, already had past 

due promissory notes as of March 31, 2019. 

69. These statements regarding Platinum’s successful business and its 

ability to make timely payments were false and misleading because Platinum did 

not have a successful business that would allow it to repay the promissory notes 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 20 of 39 PageID: 20



21 
 

and, in fact, Ciccone had past due promissory notes as of March 31, 2019 that he 

was unable to repay. 

70. These statements regarding Platinum’s business and resulting ability 

to make timely payments was false and misleading when made, and Ciccone and 

Platinum knew or were reckless in not knowing, and should have known, that the 

statements regarding Platinum’s success and its ability to make timely payments 

were false and misleading.  Ciccone, as the sole owner, managing member, and 

president of Platinum and the person with sole control over the Platinum bank 

accounts, knew the true state of Platinum’s business and its default on previous 

promissory notes.   

71. The false and misleading statements regarding Platinum’s business 

and ability to make timely payments were material to investors.  A reasonable 

investor would want to know whether the borrower will have the ability to make 

timely payment. 

D. Misstatements Concerning Ciccone’s Ability to Enter into Promissory 
Notes. 
 

72. Ciccone and Platinum made material misrepresentations regarding 

Ciccone’s ability to enter into promissory notes. 

73. Throughout the Relevant Period, Ciccone and Platinum made 

statements about entering into lending arrangements but did not disclose that 

Ciccone was legally prohibited from entering into such lending arrangements. 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 21 of 39 PageID: 21



22 
 

74. The Ciccone Promissory Notes and Platinum Promissory Notes 

represented that the Borrower agreed to pay certain principal and interest on an 

agreed date. 

75. As detailed above, in or about yMay 2019 and continuing through 

October 2019, Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 that Platinum and Ciccone desired to 

borrow money for its luxury travel business and would repay the principal and 

interest from the profits of the business, with the intention, expectation, and 

knowledge that Sales Agent 1 would pass along that false and misleading 

information in the solicitation of investors to purchase Platinum Promissory Notes. 

76. A reasonable investor would have understood from these statements 

that Ciccone was permitted to enter into lending arrangements. 

77. These statements regarding Ciccone’s ability to enter into promissory 

notes were false and misleading because due to a prior felony criminal conviction 

and resulting conditions of supervised release from prison, Ciccone was prohibited 

from entering into loan agreements without prior approval of his probation officer, 

and he had not requested approval of these transactions. 

78. On or about May 12, 2014, Ciccone pleaded guilty to, and was 

convicted of one count of mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 and one count of 

filing a false income tax return under 26 U.S.C. § 7206 in United States v. 

Ciccone, No. 2:2011cr554 (D.N.J. May 12, 2014).   

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 22 of 39 PageID: 22



23 
 

79. As part of the criminal judgment entered against him, Ciccone was 

sentenced to serve 36 months in prison, and upon release from imprisonment 

placed on supervised release for three years.  The terms for Ciccone’s supervised 

release contained special conditions including that Ciccone was “prohibited from 

incurring any new credit charges, . . . or incurring any new monetary loan, 

obligation, or debt, by whatever name known, without approval of the U.S. 

Probation Office,” and to “refrain from seeking or holding employment in any 

position which involves fund raising. . . .”   

80. On or about March 16, 2017, Ciccone was released from prison.  The 

special conditions of his supervised release remained in place from March 16, 2017 

until March 3, 2021 when his supervised release was terminated.  

81. Ciccone did not seek approval from his U.S. Probation Office for any 

of the monetary loans, obligations, or debts, or the sale of the securities (i.e., the 

promissory notes) described in this Complaint. 

82. Ciccone and Platinum omitted to state material facts that were 

necessary to render their statements regarding Ciccone’s ability to enter into 

promissory notes not misleading.  These omissions include that Ciccone was 

legally prohibited from entering into such lending arrangements. 

83. These statements regarding Ciccone’s ability to enter into promissory 

notes were false and misleading when made, and Ciccone and Platinum knew or 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 23 of 39 PageID: 23



24 
 

were reckless in not knowing, and should have known, that the statements were 

false and misleading.  Ciccone was aware of the terms of his supervised release 

from prison. 

84. The false and misleading statements regarding Ciccone’s ability to 

enter into promissory notes were material to investors.  A reasonable investor 

would want to know that a person to whom it is lending money is legally 

prohibited from entering into lending arrangements due to a prior felony criminal 

conviction. 

E. Misstatements Concerning Collateral for the Promissory Notes 
 

85. Ciccone and Platinum made material misrepresentations regarding the 

collateral for the promissory notes. 

86. Throughout the Relevant Period, Ciccone and Platinum represented 

that the Platinum Promissory Notes were secured by certain collateral, but did not 

disclose that certain of the collateral was pledged on multiple promissory notes and 

that Ciccone did not own the other claimed collateral.   

87. Between May 15, 2019 and October 8, 2019, Ciccone and Platinum 

represented in each of the Platinum Promissory Notes that the “Note is secured by 

the borrower’s personal net worth and assets … including [a] 2016 BMW … and 

[a] Certificate of Title [to] property located at … Mahogany Cove San Diego, 

CA….”   

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 24 of 39 PageID: 24



25 
 

88. A reasonable investor would have understood from these 

representations that its investment was secured by a luxury car and real property 

owned by Ciccone.  A reasonable investor would not have understood that the 

luxury car had been previously pledged as collateral or that Ciccone did not own 

the claimed real property. 

89. These statements regarding the collateral for the promissory notes 

were false and misleading because the 2016 BMW was purchased for 

approximately $54,000 and was pledged as collateral for several promissory notes 

that exceeded its value, and Ciccone did not own the property at Mahogany Cove, 

San Diego, California. 

90. Ciccone and Platinum omitted to state material facts that were 

necessary to render their statements regarding the collateral for the promissory 

notes not misleading.  These omissions include that the 2016 BMW was purchased 

for approximately $54,000 and was pledged as collateral for several promissory 

notes that exceeded its value and that Ciccone did not own the property at 

Mahogany Cove, San Diego, California. 

91. These statements regarding the collateral for the promissory notes 

were false and misleading when made, and Ciccone and Platinum knew or were 

reckless in not knowing, and should have known, that the statements regarding the 

collateral for the promissory notes were false and misleading.  Ciccone, as the sole 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 25 of 39 PageID: 25



26 
 

owner, managing member, and president of Platinum was aware that the BMW had 

been pledged as collateral for several promissory notes that exceeded its value and 

that he did not own the property that was pledged as collateral in the promissory 

notes. 

92. The false and misleading statements regarding the collateral for the 

promissory notes were material to investors.  A reasonable investor would want to 

know that the collateral pledged would not provide security for its investment. 

F. Misstatements to Existing Investors Concerning Delays in Making 
Payment 
 

93. During August 2019, Ciccone made a series of false statements, 

including fabricating documents, to explain why payments due under the 

promissory notes were not being timely made.   

94. During August 2019, Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 in telephone 

conversations, emails, and text messages that Platinum Enterprise’s bank was 

holding deposits from a hotel, with which Platinum was purportedly doing 

business, and the funds would be wired to investors in five days as repayment on 

their outstanding Platinum Promissory Notes.   

95. On or about August 19, 2019, Ciccone forwarded a fabricated email to 

Sales Agent 1. The fabricated email purported to be an email from a bank 

employee verifying bank accounts held a total balance of $167,988 and stating the 

wire transfers to investors were still on hold.  On or about August 19, 2019, 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 26 of 39 PageID: 26



27 
 

Platinum and Platinum Enterprises did not possess $167,988 in their bank 

accounts. 

96. On or about August 27, 2019, based upon the false information 

provided by Ciccone, Sales Agent 1 drafted a letter, which Ciccone reviewed and 

signed.  In the letter, Ciccone and Platinum falsely represented that delays in 

payments to the investors were caused by Platinum opening a new bank account 

and the hotel cancelling the checks it had issued to Platinum.  Ciccone directed 

Sales Agent 1 to send the letter to investors.  Sales Agent 1 sent the letter to five 

investors to whom payment was due.  A reasonable investor would have 

understood from these communications that the delay in making payment under 

existing promissory notes was caused by the reasons Ciccone provided and that 

these were problems that could be overcome and were not fundamental to 

Platinum’s business. 

97. These statements regarding the reasons for Platinum’s failure to make 

timely payments were false and misleading because there was no issue with the 

bank.  Rather, Platinum did not have the necessary money to make the payments. 

98. Ciccone and Platinum omitted to state material facts that were 

necessary to render their statements regarding Platinum’s failure to make timely 

payment not misleading.  These omissions include that Platinum did not have the 

funds to make payment as required. 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 27 of 39 PageID: 27



28 
 

99. These statements regarding Platinum’s failure to make timely 

payment were false and misleading when made, and Ciccone and Platinum knew 

or were reckless in not knowing, and should have known, that the statements 

regarding Platinum’s failure to make timely payment were false and misleading.  

Ciccone, as the sole owner, managing member, and president of Platinum and the 

person with sole control over the Platinum bank accounts, knew that there was no 

issue with the bank but, rather, Platinum did not have the necessary money to make 

payment. 

100. The false and misleading statements regarding Platinum’s failure to 

make timely payment were material to investors.  A reasonable investor would 

want to know the true cause for the delay in making payment. 

101. After receiving this false and misleading information about Ciccone’s 

purported problems with the bank, two investors purchased additional Platinum 

Promissory Notes during September and October 2019. 

IV. Ciccone Engaged in Deceptive Lulling Conduct. 
 
102. Ciccone made false and misleading statements to investors through 

Sales Agent 1 to prevent the investors from learning that Platinum would not be 

able to make payments as promised in the Platinum Promissory Notes.  Ciccone 

provided this information to Sales Agent 1 with the knowledge and expectation 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 28 of 39 PageID: 28



29 
 

that Sales Agent 1 would provide that information to investors to delay their 

demands for repayment. 

103. First, as described above, Ciccone made false statements regarding the 

delay in making payment in August 2019. 

104. Second, through the late summer and fall of 2019, Ciccone made 

repeated statements to Sales Agent 1 about why payments to investors were 

delayed, including representing that a bank had frozen certain funds and that 

Ciccone was appearing before a court to obtain an order to unfreeze these funds.   

105. These statements about court actions were false and misleading 

because Ciccone filed no lawsuit, did not appear at hearings to release the funds, 

and the banks did not hold any funds paid by the hotel or frozen in the accounts. 

106. Third, in or about December 2019, Ciccone sent Sales Agent 1 a copy 

of his personal financial statement that showed that Ciccone had a net worth of 

over $5.5 million from which investors could be repaid.  The financial statement 

was false because Ciccone did not have the assets represented. 

107. Fourth, in January 2020, Ciccone falsely told Sales Agent 1 that he 

personally had substantial assets, but those assets were unavailable to be used to 

repay investors due to a court order.   

108. On or about January 9, 2020, Ciccone told Sales Agent 1 that Ciccone 

owned funds held in a bank account in the name of a family trust that were 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 29 of 39 PageID: 29



30 
 

restricted by a court proceeding, and sent Sales Agent 1 the first page of a bank 

statement for the account showing a balance of over $3.3 million as of December 

31, 2019.  Ciccone fabricated the bank statement.  In fact, Platinum previously 

owned the account, and the account was closed on April 2, 2019 because of 

overdrawn funds.   

V. In the Alternative, Ciccone Violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act 
and Rule 10b-5(b) Thereunder Through or By Means of the Action of 
Sales Agent 1. 
 
109. In the alternative to the claim that Ciccone, directly or indirectly, 

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

respect to those statements made through Sales Agent 1, Ciccone committed the 

violations through the actions of Sales Agent 1 as prohibited by Section 20(b) of 

the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(b)].   

110. From approximately May through October 2019, Ciccone used Sales 

Agent 1 to solicit investors.   

111. As detailed above, Ciccone knowingly or recklessly provided false 

and misleading information to Sales Agent 1 with the intention, expectation, and 

knowledge that Sales Agent 1 would pass along that false and misleading 

information in the solicitation of investors to purchase Platinum Promissory Notes. 

112. Sales Agent 1 provided the false and misleading information to 

investors in connection with the sales of Platinum Promissory Notes.   

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 30 of 39 PageID: 30



31 
 

VI. Defendants’ Conduct Was in the Offer, Purchase, and Sale of Securities. 
 
113. The misstatements alleged herein were made by Ciccone and 

Platinum to induce investors to purchase Ciccone Promissory Notes and Platinum 

Promissory Notes, and as stated herein certain investors did purchase those 

promissory notes. 

114. Accordingly, Ciccone and Platinum made material misstatements in 

the offer or sale of securities and in connection with the purchase or sale of 

securities. 

VII. Platinum Promissory Notes Were Sold When No Registration Statement 
Was in Effect. 
 
115. Sections 5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77e(a) and (c)] 

make it unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, to use interstate commerce 

or the mails, to send a security unless a registration statement is in effect as to the 

security, or to offer to sell a security unless a registration statement has been filed 

as to such security.  A registration statement is transaction specific.  Each offer and 

sale of a security must either be made under a registration statement or fall under a 

registration exemption. 

116. As detailed above, from May to October 2019, Ciccone and Platinum, 

directly or indirectly through the acts of Sales Agent 1, offered and sold securities 

in the form of Platinum Promissory Notes to at least seventeen investors and 

obtained approximately $1,022,680.   

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 31 of 39 PageID: 31



32 
 

117. Ciccone was a necessary participant and substantial factor in the 

securities offerings identified above.  Among other things, Ciccone as the sole 

owner, managing member, and president of Platinum arranged the offering of 

Platinum Promissory Notes, signed the Platinum Promissory Notes, and made the 

statements to induce investors to purchase the Platinum Promissory Notes.  As 

such, Ciccone’s actions were integral to the success of the offering. 

118. No registration statement was filed or in effect with the SEC for the 

offers and sales of the Platinum Promissory Notes. 

119. No exemption from registration existed with respect to the offering.  

120. Ciccone and Platinum offered and sold securities using the means or 

instruments of interstate commerce, including, but not limited to, telephone, email, 

and wire transfers. 

VIII. Relief Defendant Platinum Enterprises Received Proceeds from 
Defendants’ Fraud to Which It Has No Legitimate Claim. 
 
121. As alleged above in paragraph 22, Relief Defendant Platinum 

Enterprises received proceeds from Defendants’ fraud for which it provided no 

reciprocal goods or services, and to which it has no legitimate claim.  As a result, 

those funds should be returned to defrauded investors. 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 32 of 39 PageID: 32



33 
 

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
Fraud—Section 10(b) of the Exchange and Rule 10b-5 Thereunder  

(Both Defendants) 
 

122. The SEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 

through 121 as though fully set forth herein. 

123. By virtue of the foregoing, Ciccone and Platinum, directly or 

indirectly, acting with scienter, by use of the means or instrumentalities of 

interstate commerce, or of the mails, or of a facility of a national securities 

exchange, in connection with the purchase or sale of a security: (a) employed 

devices, schemes or artifices to defraud; (b) made untrue statements of material 

fact or omitted 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 (c) engaged in acts, practices or courses of business which operated or would 

operate as a fraud or deceit upon another person. 

124. By reason of the conduct described above, Ciccone and Platinum, 

directly or indirectly, violated, and unless restrained and enjoined, will again 

violate, 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(b)]. 

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
Fraud – Violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) 

Thereunder as Prohibited by Section 20(b) of the Exchange Act  
(In the Alternative to Claim 1’s 10b-5(b) Claim with respect to Statements Made 

Through Sales Agent 1, Against Defendant Ciccone) 
 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 33 of 39 PageID: 33



34 
 

125. The SEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 

through 121 as though fully set forth herein. 

126. Section 20(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(b)] precludes any 

person, directly or indirectly, from doing any act which would be unlawful under 

the Exchange Act for such person to do, through or by means of any other person. 

127. By knowingly or recklessly using Sales Agent 1 to solicit investors, 

providing false and misleading information to Sales Agent 1, with the intent that 

Sales Agent 1 use the false and misleading information in connection with the sale 

of securities, Ciccone, directly or indirectly, violated Section 20(b) of the 

Exchange Act.  These acts, done through and by means of Sales Agent 1, violated 

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

78j(b) and 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5(b)].  

128. By reason of the conduct described above, Ciccone directly or 

indirectly violated, and unless restrained and enjoined, will again violate, Sections 

10(b) and 20(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(b) thereunder. 

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
Fraud – Section 17(a) of the Securities Act 

(Both Defendants) 

129. The SEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 

through 121 as though fully set forth herein. 

130. By virtue of the foregoing, Ciccone and Platinum have, directly or 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 34 of 39 PageID: 34



35 
 

indirectly, in the offer or sale of securities, by use of the means or instruments of 

transportation or communication in interstate commerce or by use of the mails, (1) 

employed a device, scheme, or artifice to defraud with scienter; (2) obtained 

money or property by means of an untrue statement of material fact or omission to 

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

circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, and/or (3) engaged in 

transactions, practices or courses of business that operated or would operate as a 

fraud or deceit upon the purchasers of such securities.  

131. Accordingly, Ciccone and Platinum violated and, unless restrained 

and enjoined, will again violate Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 

77q(a)]. 

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
Offer and Sale of Unregistered Securities – Section 5(a) and (c) of the 

Securities Act  
(Both Defendants) 

132. The SEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 

through 121 as though fully set forth herein. 

133. Ciccone and Platinum, directly or indirectly, singly or in concert, 

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 caused to be carried through the mails or in interstate 

commerce by any means or instruments of transportation, securities for the purpose 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 35 of 39 PageID: 35



36 
 

of sale or for delivery after sale when no registration statement was in effect as to 

those securities. 

134. Ciccone and Platinum, directly or indirectly, singly or in concert, 

made use of the means or instruments of transportation or communication in 

interstate commerce or of the mails to offer to sell or offer to buy securities 

through the use or medium of a prospectus or otherwise, when no registration 

statement had been filed for those securities. 

135. Accordingly, Ciccone and Platinum violated and, unless restrained 

and enjoined, will again violate Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act [15 

U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and 77e(c)].   

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
Disgorgement from Relief Defendant –  

Section 6501 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, 
Pub. L. No. 116-283 and Equitable Principles  

(Relief Defendant Platinum Enterprise)  

136. The SEC realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 

through 121 as though fully set forth herein. 

137. Relief Defendant Platinum Enterprises received money as a result of 

the violations of the federal securities laws by Ciccone and Platinum, to which 

Platinum Enterprises has no legitimate claim. 

138. Platinum Enterprises has no legitimate claim to the funds it received 

from investors, having obtained the funds under circumstances in which it is not 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 36 of 39 PageID: 36



37 
 

just, equitable or conscionable for Platinum Enterprises to retain the funds, and 

therefore it has been unjustly enriched.  

139. Platinum Enterprises should be required to disgorge all ill-gotten 

funds, along with prejudgment interest, under the equitable doctrines of 

disgorgement, unjust enrichment, and constructive trust.   

PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

WHEREFORE, the SEC respectfully requires that this Court: 

I. 

Find that the Defendants committed the violations alleged in this Complaint; 

II. 

Enter an injunction, in a form consistent with Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure, permanently restraining and enjoining each of the Defendants from violating, 

directly or indirectly, Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§ 

77e(a), 77e(c), and 77q(a)] and 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]; and, in the alternative, Ciccone from 

violating Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5(b) as prohibited by Section 20(b) of the Exchange 

Act [15 U.S.C. § 78t(b)] ;  

III. 

Enter an injunction permanently restraining and enjoining Ciccone from 

participating, directly or indirectly, including, but not limited to, through any entity owned 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 37 of 39 PageID: 37



38 
 

or controlled by him, in the issuance, purchase, offer, or sale of any security, provided, 

however, that such injunction shall not prevent Ciccone from purchasing or selling 

securities for his own personal accounts;  

IV. 

Enter an order barring Ciccone from serving as an officer or director of a publicly-

held company pursuant to Section 21(e) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(e)] and 

Section 21(d)(2) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(2))]; 

V. 

Order Defendants and Relief Defendants to disgorge all ill-gotten gains, together 

with pre-judgment interest, derived from the activities set forth in this Complaint; 

VI. 

Order Defendants to pay civil money 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)];  

VII. 

Retain jurisdiction of this action in accordance with the principles of equity and the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in order to implement and carry out the terms of all orders 

and decrees that may be entered, or to entertain any suitable application or motion for 

additional relief within the jurisdiction of this Court; and  

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 38 of 39 PageID: 38



39 
 

VIII. 

Grant such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. 

JURY DEMAND 

The SEC demands a trial by jury on all claims so triable. 

Dated: September 29, 2021 

Respectfully submitted, 

  
/s/ Leslie J. Hughes   
Leslie J. Hughes, (Colo. Bar No. 15423]  
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 
1961 Stout Street, Suite 1700 
Denver, CO 80294-1961 
Telephone: 303-844-1086 
Email: [email protected] 
 

     
    Attorney for Plaintiff 

United States Securities and Exchange 
Commission 
 

 

Case 2:21-cv-17768   Document 1   Filed 09/29/21   Page 39 of 39 PageID: 39

mailto:[email protected]