Ussec v. Robert Morano ( 2020 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 13 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
U.S. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE No. 19-35556
COMMISSION,
D.C. No. 3:18-cv-00386-HZ
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. MEMORANDUM*
ROBERT M. MORANO,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Marco A. Hernandez, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 8, 2020**
San Francisco, California
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and HAWKINS and McKEOWN, Circuit
Judges.
Robert M. Morano (“Morano”) appeals pro se the imposition of a civil penalty
for his admitted insider trading in violation of Sections 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Exchange Act
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
1
Rule 10b-5(b), 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5(b). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §
1291 and affirm.
Morano’s consent judgment resolved all issues of liability, leaving only a
determination whether a civil penalty should be imposed and, if so, in what amount.
The Securities & Exchange Commission (“SEC”) argued for a penalty of three times
the amount of insider trading gain. The district court imposed a penalty of $75,000,
or twice the gain.
Reviewing for abuse of discretion, SEC v. Platforms Wireless Int’l Corp., 617
F.3d 1072, 1098 (9th Cir. 2010), the determination to impose a civil penalty and
calculation of its amount were reasonable given Morano’s admitted misuse of insider
information and his admission that he had engaged in similar conduct in the past.
AFFIRMED.
2