CFTC seeks entries of default against defendants in ROFX case
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is pushing for entries of default in the case concerning the fraudulent activities of ROFX and the individuals linked to it.
On September 21, 2022, the CFTC filed a motion with the Florida Southern District Court requesting that the Clerk of the Court enter defaults against nine of the ten defendants in the case: (1) Jase Davis, (2) Borys Konovalenko, (3) Anna Shymko, (4) Alla Skala, (5) Easy Com LLC d/b/a ROFX, (6) Global E-Advantages LLC a/k/a Kickmagic LLC d/b/a ROFX, (7) Grovee LLC d/b/a ROFX, (8) Notus LLC d/b/a ROFX, and (9) Shopostar LLC d/b/a ROFX, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) for failure to answer, plead, or otherwise defend in a timely manner.
The remaining defendant, Timothy Stubbs, obtained an extension of time to file a response or answer to the CFTC’s First Amended Complaint on or before October 11, 2022.
Let’s recall that less than a month ago, the CFTC filed an amended complaint against the defendants.
The CFTC alleges that, from at least January 2018 through September 2021, Defendants Jase Davis, Borys Konovalenko, Anna Shymko, Alla Skala, and Timothy Stubbs, individually and as the controlling persons of the interrelated companies Notus LLC d/b/a ROFX, Easy Com LLC d/b/a ROFX, Global E-Advantages LLC a/k/a Kickmagic LLC d/b/a ROFX, Grovee LLC d/b/a ROFX, and Shopostar LLC d/b/a ROFX, acting through, and/or in conjunction with, the web-based entity www.ROFX.net, acting as a common enterprise, misappropriated at least $58 million as part of a fraudulent scheme in, and/or in connection with, the offering of leveraged, margined or financed agreements, contracts, or transactions in retail Forex to U.S. and international customers who were not eligible contracts participants (ECPs).
Davis, Konovalenko, Skala, and Stubbs, individually and as the controlling persons of Corporate Defendants—operating through a maze of interrelated companies, shared managers and members—accepted funds from ROFX customers that were intended to be used to margin, leverage or finance agreements, contracts, or transactions in forex as described on the ROFX website.
Corporate Defendants and Facilitating Defendants acted as a single, integrated common enterprise and misappropriated all of the $58 million they accepted from ROFX customers by immediately wiring said funds to offshore entities with no connection to forex trading.
The Fraudulent Enterprise allegedly utilized the ROFX website as a vehicle to solicit and obtain customers. On the website, ROFX claimed to create and trade retail forex accounts on behalf of customers utilizing a highly successful automated trading robot purportedly created in 2009. ROFX advertised itself as a legitimate forex brokerage with offices in Miami, London, and Hong Kong and guaranteed coverage of any trading losses sustained by customers.
Customers typically submitted an online application form on the website to open a retail forex trading account with ROFX. Thereafter, ROFX emailed customers an “invoice” directing customers to deposit or wire their funds to one or more of the Corporate Defendants, at continually changing U.S.-based bank accounts carried in the name of one of the Corporate Defendants, opened and/or controlled by Davis, Konovalenko, Skala, and Stubbs.
Throughout the Relevant Period, Davis, Konovalenko, Skala, and Stubbs accepted ROFX customers’ funds into domestic Corporate Defendants’ bank accounts but did not send ROFX customers’ funds to a CFTC-registered futures commission merchant (“FCM”) or retail foreign currency dealer (“RFED”) to trade on behalf of customers. Rather, Davis, Konovalenko, Skala, and Stubbs immediately wired ROFX customer funds offshore to non-trading corporate entities in Poland, Thailand, and elsewhere, as well as to themselves.
Davis, Konovalenko, Shymko, Skala, and Stubbs were all corporate managers and officers of Corporate Defendants and did business as ROFX utilizing the ROFX website to solicit customers on their behalf as part of the Fraudulent Enterprise.
Davis, Konovalenko, Skala, and Stubbs repeatedly accepted ROFX customer funds into Corporate Defendants’ bank accounts they controlled demonstrating knowledge of and participation in the predicate solicitation while knowingly, or recklessly, failing to disclose material facts to ROFX customers. Upon information and belief, there is no legally formed business entity known as “ROFX” anywhere in the U.S.
Defendants were joined in a common purpose of defrauding and profiting from ROFX customers, had relationships with and among each other, depended upon the participation of each other to accomplish their common purpose, and were each employed by and/or associated with the Fraudulent Enterprise during the Relevant Period. Defendants accepted and misappropriated at least $58 million from over 1,100 ROFX customers during the Relevant Period.
By engaging in this conduct, Defendants have engaged in acts and practices in violation of the Commodity Exchange Act (the “Act”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 6b(a)(2)(A), (C) and 9(1), and Commission Regulations, 17 C.F.R. §§ 5.2(b)(1), (3) and 180.1(a) (2021).
Furthermore, Corporate Defendants, doing business as ROFX through the ROFX website, each acted as FCMs without being registered with the CFTC in violation of 7 U.S.C. § 6d(a)(1) because they were engaged in soliciting or accepting orders for retail forex transactions and accepted funds in or in connection therewith.
Accordingly, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. §§ 2(c)(2)(C) and 13a-1, the CFTC brings this action to enjoin Defendants’ unlawful acts and practices, to compel their compliance with the Act and Regulations, and to enjoin them from engaging in any commodity-interest related activity. The CFTC also seeks civil monetary penalties for each violation of the Act and Regulations, and remedial ancillary relief, including, but not limited to, disgorgement, pre- and post-judgment interest, and such other relief as the Court may deem necessary and appropriate.
The CFTC notes that, unless restrained and enjoined by the Court, the defendants are likely to continue to engage in the acts and practices alleged in this Complaint, and similar acts and practices.