SEC v. Scott Jeffrey Mason; Rubicon Wealth Management, LLC; and Orchard Park Real Estate Holdings LLC, No. 2:25-cv-00292, Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Dec. 19, 2025) — Judgment

[OCR_UNRECOVERABLE method=recover reason=missing_pdf ts=2026-08-11T14:53:34.354Z]                                                           

1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff,
Case No. 2:25-cv-00292 

v.

SCOTT JEFFREY MASON, RUBICON WEALTH 
MANAGEMENT, LLC, and ORCHARD PARK 
REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC, 

Defendants.

FINAL JUDGMENT OF DEFENDANT SCOTT JEFFREY MASON 

The Securities and Exchange Commission having filed a Complaint and Defendant Scott 

Jeffrey Mason (“Mason” or “Defendant”) having entered a general appearance; consented to the 

Court’s jurisdiction over Defendant and the subject matter of this action; consented to entry of a 

preliminary or partial Judgment entered March 3, 2025 (Doc. No. 12); consented to entry of this 

Final Judgment; waived findings of fact and conclusions of law; and waived any right to appeal 

from this Final Judgment: 

I. 

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendant is permanently 

restrained and enjoined from violating, directly or indirectly, Section 10(b) of the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 promulgated 

thereunder [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5], by using any means or instrumentality of interstate 

commerce, or of the mails, or of any facility of any national securities exchange, in connection 

with the purchase or sale of any security: 

Case 2:25-cv-00292-TJS     Document 18     Filed 12/12/25     Page 1 of 5



2 
 

 (a)  to employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud; 

 (b)  to make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact 

  necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances 

  under which they were made, not misleading; or 

 (c)  to engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would 

  operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person  

by, directly or indirectly, (i) creating a false appearance or otherwise deceiving any person, or (ii) 

disseminating false or misleading documents, materials, or information or making, either orally 

or in writing, any false or misleading statement in any communication with any investor or 

prospective investor, about: 

 (a)  any investment strategy or investment in securities; 

 (b)  the prospects for success of any product or company; 

 (c)  the use of investor funds; 

 (d)  compensation to any person; 

 (e)  Defendant’s qualifications to advise investors; or 

 (f)  the misappropriation of investor funds or investment proceeds. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that, as provided in 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d)(2), the foregoing paragraph also binds the following who 

receive actual notice of this Judgment by personal service or otherwise: (a) Defendant’s officers, 

agents, servants, employees, and attorneys; and (b) other persons in active concert or 

participation with Defendant or with anyone described in (a). 

II. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendant is 

Case 2:25-cv-00292-TJS     Document 18     Filed 12/12/25     Page 2 of 5



3 
 

permanently restrained and enjoined from violating, while acting as an investment adviser, 

Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Investment Advisers 

Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 80b-6(1) and (2)] by using the mails or any means or instrumentality of 

interstate commerce, directly or indirectly: 

 (a)  to employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud or prospective client; or 

 (b)  to engage in any transaction, practice, or course of business which operates as a 

  fraud or deceit upon any client or prospective client  

by, directly or indirectly, (i) creating a false appearance or otherwise deceiving any client or 

prospective client, or (ii) disseminating false or misleading documents, materials, or information 

or making, either orally or in writing, any false or misleading statement in any communication 

with any client or prospective client, about: 

 (a)  any investment strategy or investment in securities; 

 (b)  the prospects for success of any product or company; 

 (c)  the use of client funds; 

 (d)  compensation to any person; 

 (e)  Defendant’s qualifications to advise clients; or 

 (f)  the misappropriation of client funds or investment proceeds. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that, as provided in 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d)(2), the foregoing paragraph also binds the following who 

receive actual notice of this Judgment by personal service or otherwise: (a) Defendant’s officers, 

agents, servants, employees, and attorneys; and (b) other persons in active concert or 

participation with Defendant or with anyone described in (a). 

 

Case 2:25-cv-00292-TJS     Document 18     Filed 12/12/25     Page 3 of 5



4 
 

III. 

 IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that 

Defendant is liable for disgorgement of $17,734,515.69, representing net profits gained as a 

result of the conduct alleged in the Complaint, and prejudgment interest of $4,913,428.60, for a 

total of $22,647,944.29, joint and several with co-defendants Rubicon Wealth Management, 

LLC, and Orchard Park Real Estate Holdings LLC.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, 

AND DECREED that Defendant’s disgorgement and prejudgment interest obligation of 

$22,647,944.29 is deemed satisfied by the restitution ordered and the order of forfeiture entered 

in the parallel criminal case, United States v. Scott Mason, Case No. 2:25-cr-00025 (TJS) (E.D. 

Pa.). 

IV. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Consent is 

incorporated herein with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein, and that Defendant 

shall comply with all of the undertakings and agreements set forth therein. 

V. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that, for purposes of 

exceptions to discharge set forth in Section 523 of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §523, the 

allegations in the complaint are true and admitted by Defendant, and further, any debt for 

disgorgement, prejudgment interest, civil penalty or other amounts due by Defendant under this  

Judgment or any other judgment, order, consent order, decree or settlement agreement entered in 

connection with this proceeding, is a debt for the violation by Defendant of the federal securities 

laws or any regulation or order issued under such laws, as set forth in Section 523(a)(19) of the 

Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(19). 

Case 2:25-cv-00292-TJS     Document 18     Filed 12/12/25     Page 4 of 5



5 
 

VI. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that this Court shall 

retain jurisdiction of this matter for the purposes of enforcing the terms of this Final Judgment. 

SO ORDERED. 

 

 
Dated:  ______________, 2025  __________________________________   
      HON. TIMOTHY J. SAVAGE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
 

December 12 /s/ Timothy J. Savage

Case 2:25-cv-00292-TJS     Document 18     Filed 12/12/25     Page 5 of 5