Navellier & Associates Inc

Allegations: ON AUGUST 31, 2017, THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION ("SEC") FILED A LAWSUIT IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ALLEGING THAT NAVELLIER & ASSOCIATES, INC. ("NAI") AND LOUIS NAVELLIER ("LN") EACH ALLEGEDLY VIOLATED SECTIONS 206(1), 206(2), AND 206(4) OF THE INVESTMENT ADVISORS ACT OF 1940 AND RULE 206(4)-1(A)(5); AND ALTERNATIVELY, THAT LOUIS NAVELLIER ALLEGEDLY AIDED AND ABETTED NAI'S ALLEGED VIOLATIONS. NAI AND LOUIS NAVELLIER EACH STRENUOUSLY DENY THAT THEY COMMITTED THE ALLEGED VIOLATIONS. THE SEC CHARGES BASICALLY THAT NAI'S VIREO MARKETING MATERIALS SUPPOSEDLY FALSELY CLAIMED THAT NAI'S VIREO ALPHASECTOR STRATEGIES WERE LIVE TRADED SINCE 2001. NAI'S VIREO MARKETING MATERIALS MADE NO SUCH CLAIM. THE STATEMENT NAI ACTUALLY DISSEMINATED WAS TRUE. THE SEC ALSO ASSERTED THAT NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER DID NOT HAVE "SUPPORT" FOR THE STATEMENT NAI MADE. HOWEVER, NAI DID HAVE SUPPORT FOR ITS TRUE STATEMENT FROM NASDAQ OMX AND FROM JAY MORTON, THE ORIGINATOR OF THE STRATEGY THAT WAS LIVE TRADED SINCE 2001. THE SEC PRODUCED NO ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE THAT NAI'S ACTUAL STATEMENT WAS FALSE. DESPITE THE SEC'S LACK OF ANY EVIDENCE, THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTED PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGEMENT IN FAVOR OF THE SEC, HOLDING THAT NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER VIOLATED SECTIONS 206(1) AND 206(2). THE DISTRICT COURT SUBSEQUENTLY DISMISSED THE SEC'S REMAINING CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE. THE DISTRICT COURT SUBSEQUENTLY AWARDED THE SEC OVER $29.3 MILLION IN "DISGORGEMENT" AND PREJUDGMENT INTEREST PLUS $2.5 MILLION IN PENALTIES. THE DISTRICT COURT ALSO ENJOINED NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER FROM VIOLATING SECTIONS 206(1) AND (2) IN THE FUTURE. NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER APPEALED TO THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE STATEMENT IN NAI'S MARKETING MATERIAL WAS TRUE, AND THAT THE INVESTMENT ADVISORY FEES AND GAINS WERE LEGITIMATELY EARNED BY NAI. IN FACT, THE SUPPOSEDLY "DEFRAUDED" NAI CLIENTS GOT EXACTLY THE INVESTMENT ADVICE THEY HIRED NAI TO PROVIDE, SUFFERRED NO PECUNIARY HARM, AND RECEIVED OVER $221 MILLION IN PROFITS FROM NAI'S VIREO INVESTMENT ADVICE. ON JULY 16, 2024, THE FIRST CIRCUIT AFFIRMED THE DISTRICT COURT'S JUDGMENT BY MISCHARACTERIZING NAI'S AND LN'S EVIDENCE, IGNORING THE LACK OF SEC EVIDENCE OF "FRAUD" AND OVERLOOKING THAT NAI DID HAVE SUPPORT FOR ITS TRUE STATEMENT. THEREFORE, NAI, LN, AND THEIR ATTORNEY BELIEVE THAT THE FIRST CIRCUIT'S DECISION WAS WRONG BECAUSE IT MISCONSTRUED THE LAW, IMPROPERLY DECIDED DISPUTED FACTS WHICH A JURY SHOULD HAVE DECIDED, AND UPHELD DISGORGEMENT WHEN THE INVESTORS LOST NO MONEY AND, IN FACT, RECEIVED OVER $221 MILLION. NAI AND LN FILED A PETITION FOR REHEARING BY THE ENTIRE PANEL OF FIRST CIRCUIT JUDGES TO OVERTURN THE ERRONEOUS DECISION BECAUSE IT CONFLICTS WITH THE SUPREME COURT'S LIU DECISION AND THE SECOND CIRCUIT'S DECISION IN SEC V. GOVIL 86 F.4TH 89, 98. THE FIRST CIRCUIT EN BANC DENIED TO REHEAR AND OVERTURN THE DECISION, NAI AND LN ARE IN THE PROCESS OF, AND WILL PETITION THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT TO OVERTURN THE DECISION, BECAUSE IT CONFLICTS WITH LIU AND GOVIL AND OTHER SUPREME COURT DECISIONS. ON JUNE 12, 2020, THE SEC INSTITUTED ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS WITH THE SEC TO SANCTION OR POSSIBLY DEREGISTER NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER AND TO BAN THEM FROM BEING INVESTMENT ADVISERS. THE SEC HAS MOVED FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO BAN NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER. THEY ARE STRENUOUSLY OPPOSING THE MOTION BECAUSE THEY COMMITTED NO VIOLATIONS AND DISGORGEMENT IS NOT AUTHORIZED UNDER A CORRECT READING OF THE LIU DECISION AND UNDER GOVIL. Status: On Appeal Summary: ON AUGUST 31, 2017, THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION ("SEC") FILED A LAWSUIT IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ALLEGING THAT NAVELLIER & ASSOCIATES, INC. ("NAI") AND LOUIS NAVELLIER ("LN") EACH ALLEGEDLY VIOLATED SECTIONS 206(1), 206(2), AND 206(4) OF THE INVESTMENT ADVISORS ACT OF 1940 AND RULE 206(4)-1(A)(5); AND ALTERNATIVELY, THAT LOUIS NAVELLIER ALLEGEDLY AIDED AND ABETTED NAI'S ALLEGED VIOLATIONS. NAI AND LOUIS NAVELLIER EACH STRENUOUSLY DENY THAT THEY COMMITTED THE ALLEGED VIOLATIONS. THE SEC CHARGES BASICALLY THAT NAI'S VIREO MARKETING MATERIALS SUPPOSEDLY FALSELY CLAIMED THAT NAI'S VIREO ALPHASECTOR STRATEGIES WERE LIVE TRADED SINCE 2001. NAI'S VIREO MARKETING MATERIALS MADE NO SUCH CLAIM. THE STATEMENT NAI ACTUALLY DISSEMINATED WAS TRUE. THE SEC ALSO ASSERTED THAT NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER DID NOT HAVE "SUPPORT" FOR THE STATEMENT NAI MADE. HOWEVER, NAI DID HAVE SUPPORT FOR ITS TRUE STATEMENT FROM NASDAQ OMX AND FROM JAY MORTON, THE ORIGINATOR OF THE STRATEGY THAT WAS LIVE TRADED SINCE 2001. THE SEC PRODUCED NO ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE THAT NAI'S ACTUAL STATEMENT WAS FALSE. DESPITE THE SEC'S LACK OF ANY EVIDENCE, THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTED PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGEMENT IN FAVOR OF THE SEC, HOLDING THAT NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER VIOLATED SECTIONS 206(1) AND 206(2). THE DISTRICT COURT SUBSEQUENTLY DISMISSED THE SEC'S REMAINING CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE. THE DISTRICT COURT SUBSEQUENTLY AWARDED THE SEC OVER $29.3 MILLION IN "DISGORGEMENT" AND PREJUDGMENT INTEREST PLUS $2.5 MILLION IN PENALTIES. THE DISTRICT COURT ALSO ENJOINED NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER FROM VIOLATING SECTIONS 206(1) AND (2) IN THE FUTURE. NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER APPEALED TO THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE STATEMENT IN NAI'S MARKETING MATERIAL WAS TRUE, AND THAT THE INVESTMENT ADVISORY FEES AND GAINS WERE LEGITIMATELY EARNED BY NAI. IN FACT, THE SUPPOSEDLY "DEFRAUDED" NAI CLIENTS GOT EXACTLY THE INVESTMENT ADVICE THEY HIRED NAI TO PROVIDE, SUFFERRED NO PECUNIARY HARM, AND RECEIVED OVER $221 MILLION IN PROFITS FROM NAI'S VIREO INVESTMENT ADVICE. ON JULY 16, 2024, THE FIRST CIRCUIT AFFIRMED THE DISTRICT COURT'S JUDGMENT BY MISCHARACTERIZING NAI'S AND LN'S EVIDENCE, IGNORING THE LACK OF SEC EVIDENCE OF "FRAUD" AND OVERLOOKING THAT NAI DID HAVE SUPPORT FOR ITS TRUE STATEMENT. THEREFORE, NAI, LN, AND THEIR ATTORNEY BELIEVE THAT THE FIRST CIRCUIT'S DECISION WAS WRONG BECAUSE IT MISCONSTRUED THE LAW, IMPROPERLY DECIDED DISPUTED FACTS WHICH A JURY SHOULD HAVE DECIDED, AND UPHELD DISGORGEMENT WHEN THE INVESTORS LOST NO MONEY AND, IN FACT, RECEIVED OVER $221 MILLION. NAI AND LN FILED A PETITION FOR REHEARING BY THE ENTIRE PANEL OF FIRST CIRCUIT JUDGES TO OVERTURN THE ERRONEOUS DECISION BECAUSE IT CONFLICTS WITH THE SUPREME COURT'S LIU DECISION AND THE SECOND CIRCUIT'S DECISION IN SEC V. GOVIL 86 F.4TH 89, 98. THE FIRST CIRCUIT EN BANC DENIED TO REHEAR AND OVERTURN THE DECISION, NAI AND LN ARE IN THE PROCESS OF, AND WILL PETITION THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT TO OVERTURN THE DECISION, BECAUSE IT CONFLICTS WITH LIU AND GOVIL AND OTHER SUPREME COURT DECISIONS. ON JUNE 12, 2020, THE SEC INSTITUTED ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS WITH THE SEC TO SANCTION OR POSSIBLY DEREGISTER NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER AND TO BAN THEM FROM BEING INVESTMENT ADVISERS. THE SEC HAS MOVED FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO BAN NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER. THEY ARE STRENUOUSLY OPPOSING THE MOTION BECAUSE THEY COMMITTED NO VIOLATIONS AND DISGORGEMENT IS NOT AUTHORIZED UNDER A CORRECT READING OF THE LIU DECISION AND UNDER GOVIL.

Allegations: ON AUGUST 31, 2017, THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION ("SEC") FILED A LAWSUIT IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ALLEGING THAT NAVELLIER & ASSOCIATES, INC. ("NAI") AND LOUIS NAVELLIER ("LN") EACH ALLEGEDLY VIOLATED SECTIONS 206(1), 206(2), AND 206(4) OF THE INVESTMENT ADVISORS ACT OF 1940 AND RULE 206(4)-1(A)(5); AND ALTERNATIVELY, THAT LOUIS NAVELLIER ALLEGEDLY AIDED AND ABETTED NAI'S ALLEGED VIOLATIONS. NAI AND LOUIS NAVELLIER EACH STRENUOUSLY DENY THAT THEY COMMITTED THE ALLEGED VIOLATIONS. THE SEC CHARGES BASICALLY THAT NAI'S VIREO MARKETING MATERIALS SUPPOSEDLY FALSELY CLAIMED THAT NAI'S VIREO ALPHASECTOR STRATEGIES WERE LIVE TRADED SINCE 2001. NAI'S VIREO MARKETING MATERIALS MADE NO SUCH CLAIM. THE STATEMENT NAI ACTUALLY DISSEMINATED WAS TRUE. THE SEC ALSO ASSERTED THAT NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER DID NOT HAVE "SUPPORT" FOR THE STATEMENT NAI MADE. HOWEVER, NAI DID HAVE SUPPORT FOR ITS TRUE STATEMENT FROM NASDAQ OMX AND FROM JAY MORTON, THE ORIGINATOR OF THE STRATEGY THAT WAS LIVE TRADED SINCE 2001. THE SEC PRODUCED NO ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE THAT NAI'S ACTUAL STATEMENT WAS FALSE. DESPITE THE SEC'S LACK OF ANY EVIDENCE, THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTED PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGEMENT IN FAVOR OF THE SEC, HOLDING THAT NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER VIOLATED SECTIONS 206(1) AND 206(2). THE DISTRICT COURT SUBSEQUENTLY DISMISSED THE SEC'S REMAINING CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE. THE DISTRICT COURT SUBSEQUENTLY AWARDED THE SEC OVER $29.3 MILLION IN "DISGORGEMENT" AND PREJUDGMENT INTEREST PLUS $2.5 MILLION IN PENALTIES. THE DISTRICT COURT ALSO ENJOINED NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER FROM VIOLATING SECTIONS 206(1) AND (2) IN THE FUTURE. NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER APPEALED TO THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE STATEMENT IN NAI'S MARKETING MATERIAL WAS TRUE, AND THAT THE INVESTMENT ADVISORY FEES AND GAINS WERE LEGITIMATELY EARNED BY NAI. IN FACT, THE SUPPOSEDLY "DEFRAUDED" NAI CLIENTS GOT EXACTLY THE INVESTMENT ADVICE THEY HIRED NAI TO PROVIDE, SUFFERRED NO PECUNIARY HARM, AND RECEIVED OVER $221 MILLION IN PROFITS FROM NAI'S VIREO INVESTMENT ADVICE. ON JULY 16, 2024, THE FIRST CIRCUIT AFFIRMED THE DISTRICT COURT'S JUDGMENT BY MISCHARACTERIZING NAI'S AND LN'S EVIDENCE, IGNORING THE LACK OF SEC EVIDENCE OF "FRAUD" AND OVERLOOKING THAT NAI DID HAVE SUPPORT FOR ITS TRUE STATEMENT. THEREFORE, NAI, LN, AND THEIR ATTORNEY BELIEVE THAT THE FIRST CIRCUIT'S DECISION WAS WRONG BECAUSE IT MISCONSTRUED THE LAW, IMPROPERLY DECIDED DISPUTED FACTS WHICH A JURY SHOULD HAVE DECIDED, AND UPHELD DISGORGEMENT WHEN THE INVESTORS LOST NO MONEY AND, IN FACT, RECEIVED OVER $221 MILLION. NAI AND LN FILED A PETITION FOR REHEARING BY THE ENTIRE PANEL OF FIRST CIRCUIT JUDGES TO OVERTURN THE ERRONEOUS DECISION BECAUSE IT CONFLICTS WITH THE SUPREME COURT'S LIU DECISION AND THE SECOND CIRCUIT'S DECISION IN SEC V. GOVIL 86 F.4TH 89, 98. THE FIRST CIRCUIT EN BANC DECLINED TO REHEAR AND OVERTURN THE DECISION, NAI AND LN ARE IN THE PROCESS OF, AND WILL PETITION THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT TO OVERTURN THE DECISION, BECAUSE IT CONFLICTS WITH LIU AND GOVIL AND OTHER SUPREME COURT DECISIONS. ON JUNE 12, 2020, THE SEC INSTITUTED ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS WITH THE SEC TO SANCTION OR POSSIBLY DEREGISTER NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER AND TO BAN THEM FROM BEING INVESTMENT ADVISERS. THE SEC HAS MOVED FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO BAN NAI AND MR. NAVELLIER. THEY ARE STRENUOUSLY OPPOSING THE MOTION BECAUSE THEY COMMITTED NO VIOLATIONS AND DISGORGEMENT IS NOT AUTHORIZED UNDER A CORRECT READING OF THE LIU DECISION AND UNDER GOVIL. Status: Pending Summary: THE SEC'S ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS IS STILL PENDING.