Securities and Exchange Commission v. Su, Yin ( 2023 )

23-575-cv Securities and Exchange Commission v. Su, Yin UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER Rulings by summary order do not have precedential effect. Citation to a summary order filed on or after January 1, 2007, is permitted and is governed by federal rule of appellate procedure 32.1 and this court’s local rule 32.1.1. When citing a summary order in a document filed with this court, a party must cite either the federal appendix or an electronic database (with the notation “summary order”). A party citing a summary order must serve a copy of it on any party not represented by counsel. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second 2 Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the 3 City of New York, on the 14th day of September, two thousand twenty-three. 4 5 PRESENT: 6 JON O. NEWMAN, 7 JOSÉ A. CABRANES, 8 MARIA ARAÚJO KAHN, 9 Circuit Judges. 10 _____________________________________ 11 12 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 13 14 Plaintiff-Appellee, 15 16 v. 23-575 17 18 LIZHAO SU, ZHIQING YIN 19 20 Relief Defendants-Appellants, 21 1 1 JUN QIN, YAN ZHOU, BEI XIE, CHAOFENG JI, 2 3 Relief Defendants, 4 5 SHAOHUA MICHAEL YIN, BENJAMIN BIN CHOW 6 7 Defendants. 8 ______________________________________ 9 10 11 FOR RELIEF DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS: FRED A. ROWLEY, JR. 12 (Matthew K. Donohue and 13 Michael S. Sommer, on the 14 brief), Wilson Sonsini 15 Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., 16 Los Angeles, CA, & New 17 York, NY. 18 19 FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE: PAUL G. ÁLVAREZ, Senior 20 Appellate Counsel (Megan 21 Barbero, General Counsel, 22 and John W. Avery, 23 Deputy Solicitor, on the 24 brief), Securities and 25 Exchange Commission, 26 Washington, DC. 27 28 29 Appeal from a denial of a motion to modify an injunction by the United States 30 District Court for the Southern District of New York (J. Paul Oetken, Judge). 31 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, 32 AND DECREED that the district court’s denial of the motion to modify is AFFIRMED. 2 1 After oral argument and careful consideration, we AFFIRM the well-reasoned 2 order of the district court. 3 FOR THE COURT: 4 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of Court 3