SEC v. Marshall E. Melton; and Integrated Consulting & Management, LLC, No. LR-26292, Middle District of North Carolina (Apr. 24, 2025) — Press Release

U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Litigation Release No. 26292 / April 24, 2025 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Marshall E. Melton, et al., No. 1:23-cv-00434 (M.D.N.C. filed May 30, 2023) SEC Wins Summary Judgment Against Repeat Securities Law Violator Based on His Fraudulent Securities Offering On April 17, 2025, the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina granted the Securities and Exchange Commission’s motion for summary judgment against Marshall E. Melton and his company, Integrated Consulting & Management, LLC (collectively “Defendants”). According to the SEC’s complaint, filed on May 30, 2023, Melton raised over $1 million from seven investors, six of which had an average age of 75 when they invested in the scheme. Melton represented that investor funds would be used to buy and develop properties in downtown Laurinburg, North Carolina to generate profits for investors. The complaint, however, alleged that the representations were false, that when Melton made these misstatements, he intended to spend large chunks of the money on personal expenses unrelated to the Laurinburg properties and that Defendants in fact misused nearly two thirds of investor funds for Melton’s personal use. In awarding summary judgment in favor of the SEC on all three of its liability claims, the court found that the Defendants violated the antifraud provisions of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, based on their misrepresentations regarding the use of investor funds. The court also found that the Defendants had an affirmative duty to disclose Melton’s securities disciplinary history, consisting of a prior enforcement action brought by the SEC and prior criminal proceeding based on the same conduct. Such a duty arose, according to the court, due to the longstanding financial advisory relationship between Melton and some of the investors, and statements Melton made to another investor touting Melton’s investment expertise. According to the court, the failure to disclose Melton’s disciplinary history to these investors was a material omission. The court will decide the appropriate remedies to be imposed at a later date. The SEC’s litigation was led by M. Graham Loomis and Robert Schroeder of the SEC’s Atlanta Regional Office. The investigation was conducted by Micheal D. Watson under the supervision of Stephen E. Donahue.

U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Litigation Release No. 26292 / April 24, 2025 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Marshall E. Melton, et al., No. 1:23-cv-00434 (M.D.N.C. filed May 30, 2023) SEC Wins Summary Judgment Against Repeat Securities Law Violator Based on His Fraudulent Securities Offering On April 17, 2025, the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina granted the Securities and Exchange Commission’s motion for summary judgment against Marshall E. Melton and his company, Integrated Consulting & Management, LLC (collectively “Defendants”). According to the SEC’s complaint, filed on May 30, 2023, Melton raised over $1 million from seven investors, six of which had an average age of 75 when they invested in the scheme. Melton represented that investor funds would be used to buy and develop properties in downtown Laurinburg, North Carolina to generate profits for investors. The complaint, however, alleged that the representations were false, that when Melton made these misstatements, he intended to spend large chunks of the money on personal expenses unrelated to the Laurinburg properties and that Defendants in fact misused nearly two thirds of investor funds for Melton’s personal use. In awarding summary judgment in favor of the SEC on all three of its liability claims, the court found that the Defendants violated the antifraud provisions of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, based on their misrepresentations regarding the use of investor funds. The court also found that the Defendants had an affirmative duty to disclose Melton’s securities disciplinary history, consisting of a prior enforcement action brought by the SEC and prior criminal proceeding based on the same conduct. Such a duty arose, according to the court, due to the longstanding financial advisory relationship between Melton and some of the investors, and statements Melton made to another investor touting Melton’s investment expertise. According to the court, the failure to disclose Melton’s disciplinary history to these investors was a material omission. The court will decide the appropriate remedies to be imposed at a later date. The SEC’s litigation was led by M. Graham Loomis and Robert Schroeder of the SEC’s Atlanta Regional Office. The investigation was conducted by Micheal D. Watson under the supervision of Stephen E. Donahue.