2025-06-18 sec-litreleases litigation_release 66 KB 1,518 chars

SEC v. John M. Fife; Auctus Fund Management, LLC; and Curt Kramer, No. LR-26330, Southern District of New York (June 18, 2025) — Press Release

raw: John M. Fife, et al.; Auctus Fund Management, LLC, et al.; Curt Kramer, et al.

John M. Fife, et al.; Auctus Fund Management, LLC, et al.; Curt Kramer, et al., No. 1:20-cv-05227 (S.D.N.Y. June 18, 2025)

Caption
Tokio Marine Specialty Insurance Company v. Maxum Indemnity Company
summary

The SEC dismissed three separate civil enforcement actions against John M. Fife, Auctus Fund Management, LLC, and Curt Kramer with prejudice on June 18, 2025.

paragraph

The SEC filed joint stipulations to dismiss civil enforcement actions against John M. Fife, Auctus Fund Management, LLC, and Curt Kramer with prejudice. While specific fraud details and dollar amounts were not explicitly detailed in the dismissal, the cases spanned the N.D. Ill., D. Mass., and S.D.N.Y. districts. The Commission's decision was driven by policy considerations rather than a definitive assessment of the underlying merits.

narrative

On June 18, 2025, the SEC announced the dismissal with prejudice of three separate civil enforcement actions involving John M. Fife, Auctus Fund Management, LLC, and Curt Kramer. These cases were filed in the Northern District of Illinois, the District of Massachusetts, and the Southern District of New York. The Commission entered joint stipulations to terminate the litigation based on policy judgments rather than a specific assessment of the merits of the claims. Although specific fraud allegations and monetary amounts were not detailed in the announcement, the dismissals resolve the pending actions for each defendant. The SEC explicitly noted that these dismissals do not necessarily reflect its position on any other ongoing or future cases. This decision serves as a strategic policy move rather than a definitive ruling on the underlying securities violations.

Enriched metadata

Scheme
unclassified
Court
Southern District of New York
Case No.
1:20-cv-05227
Entity
John M. Fife, et al.; Auctus Fund Management, LLC, et al.; Curt Kramer, et al.
Classified unclassified. No EDGAR filing fingerprint (criminal/DOJ-side scheme). detection rule →
Parties
Tokio Marine Specialty Insurance CompanyMaxum Indemnity Company
Keywords
securities exchangeexchange commissioncommissionsecuritiesexchangejohn fifeauctus fundfund managementcurt kramercv-june securitiesenforcement actionsactionsjohnfife

Exhibits & Attached Documents (3)

Extracted insights

Entities 6
  • company auctus fund management, llc
  • organization Auctus Fund Management, LLC
  • person curt kramer
  • person John M. Fife
  • agency Securities and Exchange Commission
  • organization Securities and Exchange Commission
Triples 7
  • Securities And Exchange Commission filed joint stipulations
  • Securities And Exchange Commission dismiss civil enforcement actions
  • Securities And Exchange Commission exercise discretion dismiss pending enforcement actions
  • Securities And Exchange Commission seek dismissal actions
  • John M. Fife filed against Case No. 1:20-cv-05227
  • Auctus Fund Management, Llc filed against Case No. 1:23-cv-11233
  • Curt Kramer filed against Case No. 1:24-cv-03498
PDF (from attached: pdf)
Text layers
Extracted body text (1,518c)
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Litigation Release No. 26330 / June 18, 2025 Securities and Exchange Commission v. John M. Fife, et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-05227 (N.D. Ill. filed Sept. 3, 2020) Securities and Exchange Commission v. Auctus Fund Management, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-11233 (D. Mass. filed Jun. 1, 2023) Securities and Exchange Commission v. Curt Kramer, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-03498 (S.D.N.Y. filed May 7, 2024) SEC Announces Dismissal of Three Civil Enforcement Actions On June 18, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed joint stipulations with the defendants in three separate cases to dismiss, with prejudice, the following ongoing civil enforcement actions against them: Securities and Exchange Commission v. John M. Fife, et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-05227 (N.D. Ill. filed Sept. 3, 2020); Securities and Exchange Commission v. Auctus Fund Management, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-11233 (D. Mass. filed June 1, 2023); and Securities and Exchange Commission v. Curt Kramer, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-03498 (S.D.N.Y. filed May 7, 2024). The Commission’s decision to exercise its discretion and dismiss these pending enforcement actions rests on its judgment that the dismissals are appropriate as a policy matter, not on any assessment of the merits of the claims alleged in the actions. Furthermore, as stated in each of the joint stipulations, the Commission’s decision to seek dismissal of the actions “does not necessarily reflect the Commission’s position on any other case.”
OCR text (1,518c · html-text · 99% conf)
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Litigation Release No. 26330 / June 18, 2025 Securities and Exchange Commission v. John M. Fife, et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-05227 (N.D. Ill. filed Sept. 3, 2020) Securities and Exchange Commission v. Auctus Fund Management, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-11233 (D. Mass. filed Jun. 1, 2023) Securities and Exchange Commission v. Curt Kramer, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-03498 (S.D.N.Y. filed May 7, 2024) SEC Announces Dismissal of Three Civil Enforcement Actions On June 18, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed joint stipulations with the defendants in three separate cases to dismiss, with prejudice, the following ongoing civil enforcement actions against them: Securities and Exchange Commission v. John M. Fife, et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-05227 (N.D. Ill. filed Sept. 3, 2020); Securities and Exchange Commission v. Auctus Fund Management, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-11233 (D. Mass. filed June 1, 2023); and Securities and Exchange Commission v. Curt Kramer, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-03498 (S.D.N.Y. filed May 7, 2024). The Commission’s decision to exercise its discretion and dismiss these pending enforcement actions rests on its judgment that the dismissals are appropriate as a policy matter, not on any assessment of the merits of the claims alleged in the actions. Furthermore, as stated in each of the joint stipulations, the Commission’s decision to seek dismissal of the actions “does not necessarily reflect the Commission’s position on any other case.”