Order of Contempt Against Yu-Cheng Lin

UNITED
STATES
DISTRICT
COURT
DISTRICT
OF
NEW
JERSEY
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND
EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Case No.
2:17-cv-00875-JLL-JAD
Plaintiff,
vs.
YU-CHENG
LIN,
a/ic/a
BELIEVE
LIN,
Defendant.
ORDER
OF
CONTEMPT
This
matter
is
before
the
Court
on
the
motion
of
the
United
States Securities
and
Exchange
Commission
(“Commission”
or
“SEC”)
for
an
Order
to
show
cause
why
Defendant
Yu-Cheng
Lin
a/k/a
Believe
Lin
(“Defendant”)
should
not
be
held
in
contempt
and
sanctioned
(the
“Motion”)
and
Magistrate Judge
Joseph
A.
Dickson’s
April
24,
2017
Order
Requiring Defendant
To
Show Cause
Why He
Should
Not
Be
Held
In
Contempt
(ECF
No.
37).
The
Court,
having
considered
the
findings
set
forth
in
the
April
24,
2017
Order and
all of
the
papers
filed
by
the
SEC
in
this
matter,
makes the
following
findings:
WHEREAS,
the
Court
entered
the
February
9,
2017
Temporary
Restraining
Order
(“TRO”)
(ECF
No.
5)
freezing
certain
assets,
enjoining
Defendant
from
destroying
evidence,
ordering
repatriation
and
providing
other
emergency
relief,
including
expedited
discovery;

WHEREAS,
the
Court
entered
a
preliminary
injunction
against
Defendant
on
February
24,
2017
(‘TI”)
(ECF
No.
11),
extending
the
relevant
provisions
of
the
TRO;
WHEREAS,
on
April
24,
2017,
Magistrate
Judge
Joseph
A.
Dickson
issued
an
Order
Requiring
Defendant
To
Show
Cause
Why
He
Should
Not
Be
Held
In
Contempt
(ECF
No.
37),
which
made
factual
findings
regarding
Defendant’s
violations
of
the
TRO
and
P1
and
ordered
Defendant
to
personally
appear
before
this
Court
to
show
cause
why
he
should
not
be
held
in
contempt;
WHEREAS,
the
Court
finds
by
clear
and
convincing
evidence
that
(1)
Defendant
had
actual
notice
of
the
TRO
at
the
time
of
events
described
in
the
Motion
and
the
memorandum
in
support;
(2)
Defendant
had
actual
notice
of
the
PT
at
the
time
of
the
events
described
in
the
Motion
and
the
memorandum
in
support;
(3)
Defendant
was
provided
with
adequate
notice
of
the
April
24,
2017
order,
(4)
the
TRO
and
PT
clearly
and
unambiguously
ordered
Defendant
to
freeze
all
assets,
except
for
those
assets
required
to
be
repatriated,
prohibited
Defendant
from
dissipating
assets,
and
authorized
the
SEC
to
engage
in
expedited
discovery;
(5)
the
evidence
is
clear
and
convincing
that
Defendant
has
intentionally
violated
the
TRO
and
the
PT
by
dissipating
assets,
refusing
to
repatriate
funds,
and
failing
to
participate
in
discovery;
and
(6)
the
evidence
is
clear
and
convincing
that
Defendant
has
failed
to
show
cause
why
he
should
not
be
held
in
contempt;
and,
WHEREAS,
the
Court
is
authorized
to
grant
the
relief
requested
in
the
Motion
pursuant
to
its
inherent
power
to
punish
contempt,
the
Court
finds
as
follows:

The
Court
finds
that,
based
on
the
evidence
presented
to
this
Court,
Defendant
Yu-Cheng
Lin
is
in
contempt
of
the
Court’s
February
9
and
February
24,
2017
Orders.
Therefore,
the
asset
freeze
instituted
as
part
of
this
Court’s
February
9,
2017
Order
(ECF
No.
5)
and
February
24,
2017
Order
(ECF
No.
11)
shall
remain
in
full
force
and
effect
until
further
Order
of
this
Court.
Furthermore,
this
Court
having
found
Defendant
Yu
Cheng
Line
in
contempt,
Defendant
Yu-Cheng
Lin
is
hereby
sanctioned
in
the
amount
of
one
thousand
dollars
($1,000)
per
day
from
the
issuance
of
this
Order
until
such
time
as
this
Court
determines
that
Defendant
Yu-Cheng
Lin
is
in
full
compliance
with
this
Court’s
prior
orders;
and
it
is
further
ORDERED
that
the
Clerk
of
Court
shall
immediately
issue
a
warrant
for the
arrest
of
Defendant
Yu-Cheng
Lin
for
his
failure
to
obey
this
Court’s
February
9
and
February
24,
207
Orders.
Any
United
States
Marshal,
or
any
person
authorized
by
the
federal
government
including
(but
not
limited
to)
U.S.
Customs
and
Border
Control
or
BICE
to
arrest
and
incarcerate
a
person
pursuant
to
any
lawfully
issued
arrest
warrant,
shall
have
the
authority
to
arrest
Defendant
Yu-Cheng
Lin
and
incarcerate
Defendant
Yu-Cheng
Lin
at
the
nearest
federal
detention
center;
and
it
is
further
ORDERED
that,
upon
his
arrest,
Defendant
Yu-Cheng
Lin
shall
be
brought
forthwith
before
this
Court
for
any
appropriate
further
judicial
action
at
said
time;
and
it
is
further
ORDERED
that
the
United
States
Marshal
or
other
any
arresting
officer
shall
immediately
notify
this
Court
and
Plaintiff’s
attorneys
of
the
fact
of
Defendant
Yu
Cheng
Lin’s
arrest;
and
it
is
further

ORDERED
that
Defendant
Yu-Cheng
Lin
shall
be
detained
in
custody
until
otherwise
ordered
by
the
Court.
Dated:_____________
________________________
JOE.
LINARES
5’U’NITED
STATES
DISTRICT
JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION,

Case No. 2:17-cv-00875-JLL-JAD

Plaintiff,

vs.

YU-CHENG LIN, a/ic/a BELIEVE LIN,

Defendant.

ORDER OF CONTEMPT

This matter is before the Court on the motion of the United States Securities and

Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”) for an Order to show cause why

Defendant Yu-Cheng Lin a/k/a Believe Lin (“Defendant”) should not be held in

contempt and sanctioned (the “Motion”) and Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Dickson’s

April 24, 2017 Order Requiring Defendant To Show Cause Why He Should Not Be Held

In Contempt (ECF No. 37). The Court, having considered the findings set forth in the

April 24, 2017 Order and all of the papers filed by the SEC in this matter, makes the

following findings:

WHEREAS, the Court entered the February 9, 2017 Temporary Restraining Order

(“TRO”) (ECF No. 5) freezing certain assets, enjoining Defendant from destroying

evidence, ordering repatriation and providing other emergency relief, including

expedited discovery;

Case 2:17-cv-00875-JLL-JAD Document 44 Filed 05/23/17 Page 1 of 4 PageID: 825 



   

WHEREAS, the Court entered a preliminary injunction against Defendant on

February 24, 2017 (‘TI”) (ECF No. 11), extending the relevant provisions of the TRO;

WHEREAS, on April 24, 2017, Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Dickson issued an

Order Requiring Defendant To Show Cause Why He Should Not Be Held In Contempt

(ECF No. 37), which made factual findings regarding Defendant’s violations of the TRO

and P1 and ordered Defendant to personally appear before this Court to show cause

why he should not be held in contempt;

WHEREAS, the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that (1) Defendant

had actual notice of the TRO at the time of events described in the Motion and the

memorandum in support; (2) Defendant had actual notice of the PT at the time of the

events described in the Motion and the memorandum in support; (3) Defendant was

provided with adequate notice of the April 24, 2017 order, (4) the TRO and PT clearly

and unambiguously ordered Defendant to freeze all assets, except for those assets

required to be repatriated, prohibited Defendant from dissipating assets, and

authorized the SEC to engage in expedited discovery; (5) the evidence is clear and

convincing that Defendant has intentionally violated the TRO and the PT by dissipating

assets, refusing to repatriate funds, and failing to participate in discovery; and (6) the

evidence is clear and convincing that Defendant has failed to show cause why he

should not be held in contempt; and,

WHEREAS, the Court is authorized to grant the relief requested in the Motion

pursuant to its inherent power to punish contempt, the Court finds as follows:

Case 2:17-cv-00875-JLL-JAD Document 44 Filed 05/23/17 Page 2 of 4 PageID: 826 



   

The Court finds that, based on the evidence presented to this Court, Defendant

Yu-Cheng Lin is in contempt of the Court’s February 9 and February 24, 2017 Orders.

Therefore, the asset freeze instituted as part of this Court’s February 9, 2017 Order (ECF

No. 5) and February 24, 2017 Order (ECF No. 11) shall remain in full force and effect

until further Order of this Court. Furthermore, this Court having found Defendant Yu

Cheng Line in contempt, Defendant Yu-Cheng Lin is hereby sanctioned in the amount

of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per day from the issuance of this Order until such time

as this Court determines that Defendant Yu-Cheng Lin is in full compliance with this

Court’s prior orders; and it is further

ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall immediately issue a warrant for the

arrest of Defendant Yu-Cheng Lin for his failure to obey this Court’s February 9 and

February 24, 207 Orders. Any United States Marshal, or any person authorized by the

federal government including (but not limited to) U.S. Customs and Border Control or

BICE to arrest and incarcerate a person pursuant to any lawfully issued arrest warrant,

shall have the authority to arrest Defendant Yu-Cheng Lin and incarcerate Defendant

Yu-Cheng Lin at the nearest federal detention center; and it is further

ORDERED that, upon his arrest, Defendant Yu-Cheng Lin shall be brought

forthwith before this Court for any appropriate further judicial action at said time; and

it is further

ORDERED that the United States Marshal or other any arresting officer shall

immediately notify this Court and Plaintiff’s attorneys of the fact of Defendant Yu

Cheng Lin’s arrest; and it is further

Case 2:17-cv-00875-JLL-JAD Document 44 Filed 05/23/17 Page 3 of 4 PageID: 827 



   

ORDERED that Defendant Yu-Cheng Lin shall be detained in custody until

otherwise ordered by the Court.

Dated:_____________

________________________

JOE. LINARES

5’U’NITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:17-cv-00875-JLL-JAD Document 44 Filed 05/23/17 Page 4 of 4 PageID: 828