Categories
One of Joseph Cammarata’s goals as CEO of Investview was to integrate it with iGenius’ multi-level-marketing opportunity.
In this regard, the organization issued a press release in June 2021;
Investview is refocusing its efforts on Ndau. The company, whose monthly gross revenues and net profits reached record heights in the first quarter of 2021, is banking on NDA to fuel its continuing expansion.
“Ndau enables individuals to engage in the long-term ownership of a digital currency without worrying about a large range of volatility,” said Mario Romano, director of finance at Investview.
Late in 2019, Investview’s newly appointed CEO, Joseph Cammarata, stated, “I am certain that Investview, LevelX, and Prodigio will prove to be a successful combination for Investview and our customers due to our shared client-centric beliefs and passion for innovation and growth.”
After being arrested on charges of fraud, Cammarata petitioned a court for permission to liquidate his NDAU interests.
Contrary to the marketing claims made by Investview and iGenius to their distributors, Cammarata told the court that NDAU is too volatile to hold.
iGenius commits securities fraud by offering up to a 15% yearly profit on NDAU investments.
As CEO of Investview at the time, Cammarata (right) personally invested an undisclosed amount to acquire 5809 NDAU.
Rather than hang onto the eventually worthless shitcoin, Cammarata petitioned the court for permission to liquidate on September 20.
The defendant owns and controls NDAU in NDAU Wallet, which contains an account with the suffix “-kuwq.
The defendant asserts that the -kuwq account (and NDAU in general) is a volatile asset, and that the value of his shares has varied between $40,000 and $120,000.
Defendant desires to sell all of the approximately 5,809 NDAU in account-kuwq (now worth approximately $90,000 but subject to market fluctuations).
Plaintiff does not object to the sale of all NDAU in account-kuwq to protect its value, with the proceeds kept as cash in a new escrow account maintained by Defendant’s counsel, where they shall stay frozen, in accordance with the conditions of the Preliminary Injunction.
The assets of Cammarata have been frozen in accordance with an injunction issued in parallel SEC civil fraud investigations.
The motion of Cammarata was granted later that day.
Within 24 hours of Cammarata receiving approval to liquidate, NDAU fell from $14.49 to $11.40.
NDAU rebounded to the $14.50 to $15.50 range within the next twenty-four hours, allegedly due to wash trade manipulation.
In related events, Cammarata filed a motion to dissolve the injunction freezing his assets on September 8.
In his request, Cammarata asserts that he was “originally unconcerned” about the court-ordered asset freeze because he believed he could comply.
The SEC’s lawsuit was recognized, based on incontestable case law and familiarity with SEC regulations, that the SEC’s lawsuit was nothing more than a hostile prosecution aimed at obtaining an equally bogus TRO.
Cammarata’s opinion on the granted injunction evolved as he discovered the case against him was very genuine and his “indisputable case law” response was, in fact, disputable.
Now, Cammarata asserts that the temporary restraining order has resulted in a “constitutional violation” against him.
This court has sufficient evidence and case law to indicate that AlphaPlus statutorily did not and could not have engaged in any securities transactions, hence the SEC failed to raise a cause for relief in its complaint.
On September 28th, the SEC submitted its answer to Cammarata’s motion.
The motion of Cammarata is denied since he has previously consented to the entry of the Preliminary Injunction and, prior to that, to the continuation of the relief given by the Temporary Restraining Order.
Cammarata was represented by competent counsel, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, and had unrestricted access to his counsel at the time the parties consented to the Preliminary Injunction.
Instead of focusing on his case after being released from detention, Cammarata planned to flee the United States with his girlfriend.
The DOJ presented a text message from June 2022 as evidence in Cammarata’s criminal prosecution.
Cammarata appeared to admit that he had the ability to escape Florida and Bahamas border security.
This is the method by which Cammarata repeatedly transported his girlfriend into the United States undetected.
Cammarata’s aim, upon being released on bail last year, was plainly to flee the United States to Colombia and live off illicit profits.
The SEC asserts that Cammarata has “access to maritime vessels, private aircraft, and offshore assets.” Among these assets are a Bahamas island and a Colombian apartment.
Unfortunately for Cammarata, his escape plans failed, and thus we are here.
According to the SEC, Cammarata and his co-defendants committed securities fraud.
This includes disgorgement of the more than $40 million they stole, plus prejudgment interest on the disgorgement, as well as civil penalties of up to $775,000 per violation for the defendant corporations and $160,000 per violation for the individual defendants, or equal to their gross pecuniary gain.
Due to the fact that Defendants’ known assets are insufficient to cover their potential liability, the Court has appropriately frozen Defendants’ assets and the assets of entities they own or control to maintain the status quo and preserve the opportunity to collect on a judgment in this case, including civil penalties.
Due to Cammarata’s financial sophistication, international connections, and transgressions while on bail in the criminal action, there has always been and remains a substantial risk that if the asset freeze is not imposed, Cammarata will attempt to conceal assets or move them abroad, beyond the reach of this court.
In order to maintain the status quo pending the conclusion of this lawsuit, it is necessary to freeze Cammarata’s assets, as they pose the same flight risk as he himself.
The ruling on Cammarata’s motion is still pending.
