Interactive Brokers identifies personnel involved in onboarding of Ponzi scammer accounts
The lawsuit alleging that electronic trading major Interactive Brokers aided and abetted a Ponzi scheme operated by Haena Park continues at the California Northern District Court. On April 13, 2022, the parties filed a letter with the Court updating it on discovery progress.
In this lawsuit, Plaintiff Benjamin Chang alleges that Interactive Brokers aided and abetted the Haena Park scheme. Mr Chang was introduced to Park through family members and was one of the people from whom Park solicited funds. He provided Park approximately $167,000 to invest and Park represented to Plaintiff it would be invested in Forex.
Park sent Plaintiff statements indicating his investment was growing when in fact his funds had been lost, redirected to other investors as Ponzi-style dividend payments, or used for Park’s personal benefit.
Chang claims to represent himself and others similarly situated as he brings this action against Interactive Brokers LLC (IBKR) for actual damages suffered by him and the class, and for other recovery specified herein for harm caused by IBKR aiding and abetting fraud and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duties.
In the letter submitted to the Court on April 13, 2022, Interactive Brokers explains that it has completed a substantial production to the plaintiffs consisting of over 3,000 documents, which represent the vast majority (nearly 60 percent) of the approximately 5,400 documents (including communications) previously produced to regulators concerning Park.
After having conducted a reasonable investigation, IBKR has determined that these documents form the universe of documents potentially responsive to Plaintiffs’ Requests. The over 3,000 documents produced to Plaintiffs on April 12 consist of emails between IBKR and Park, Park’s account statements and account summaries, and other documents previously produced to regulators concerning Park. Thus far, Defendant IBKR has not withheld any documents on privilege grounds.
In response to a single, overbroad interrogatory, IBKR identified for Plaintiffs the five known individuals at IBKR, both current and former personnel, “who assisted with the onboarding of Haena Park’s accounts.” IBKR has also provided Plaintiffs all available contact information for the five individuals based on a reasonable search of IBKR records.
Interactive Brokers says that the deposition of any current or former IBKR personnel would be premature while the production of documents is ongoing. The parties anticipate holding a meet and confer concerning this issue within the next few days. Given the current and ongoing production of documents and other discovery, there is no discovery dispute that requires the Court’s intervention at this time, Interactive Brokers concludes.