Securities and Exchange Commission v. Firas A. Hamdan

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

HOUSTON DIVISION

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, §

§

Plaintiff,                    §

§

v.            §            Case            No.:            4:13-CV-215
§

FIRAS A. HAMDAN, Individually and §

Doing Business as FAH CAPITAL PARTNERS, §

§

Defendant, §

§

COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”),
files this Complaint and seeks emergency relief to halt an ongoing offering fraud conducted by
Defendant, Firas A. Hamdan, individually and doing business as FAH Capital Partners
(collectively, “Hamdan”), and alleges:
SUMMARY
1. Since  2007,  Hamdan  has  illegally  raised  at  least  $6.1  million  from  at  least
33  investors  by  offering  and  selling  fraudulent  investments  based  on  highly  exaggerated  claims
about  his  prowess  as  a  day  trader  in  listed  securities.    Hamdan  has  targeted  the  fraud  at  fellow
members  of  Houston’s  Lebanese  and  Druze  communities.    Hamdan  pitched  his  program  by
telling potential investors that he would pool their funds with his own funds, and those of other
investors, in a brokerage account.  He claimed that he would then use the combined funds to day
trade  using  a  proprietary  algorithm  that  had  proven  success  and  limited  risk  and  pay  them
guaranteed fixed annual returns of 30% or more.  To lure investors, Hamdan used, among other

things,  false  brokerage  documents  allegedly  demonstrating  his  past  success.    He  also  assured
potential  investors  their  principal  was  fully  secured.    However,  the  claims  Hamdan  made  to
entice investors and his promises of limited risk guaranteed returns were pure fiction.
2. To support his claims of the past success and limited risk of his program, Hamdan
made  several  false  claims  to  potential  investors.    For  example:  (a)  he  shared  falsified  TD
Ameritrade,  Inc.  (“TD  Ameritrade”)  brokerage  records  that  drastically  overstated  his  trading
gains and assets under management; (b) he lied to investors about the existence and use of a so-
called  cash  reserve  account  (“Cash  Reserve  Account”)  that  limited  his  at-risk  capital;  (c)  he
falsely represented to potential investors that their investment was secured by a $5 million “key-
man”  insurance  policy  issued  by  Northwestern  Mutual  Life  Insurance  Co.  (“Northwestern
Mutual”);  and  (d)  he  falsely  claimed  that  at  least  one  well-known  Dallas  hedge-fund  manager
had made a million-dollar investment in the MPP and had promised to invest more.
3. Although  Hamdan  did  day  trade  at  least  some  of  the  investors’  funds  in  his
brokerage  account,  he  was  anything  but  successful.    Between  2007  and  2011,  during  most  of
which time he continued to raise funds from investors, Hamdan lost almost $1.5 million through
trading  activity.    His  trading  patterns  show  that  he  lost  money  consistently  throughout  these
years  and  thus  could  not  have  generated  sufficient  returns  to  fund  the  monthly  distributions  he
was making to investors.
4. Despite  his  tremendous  losses,  Hamdan  continued  to  solicit  new  money  from
investors throughout 2012.  Starting as early as 2009, however, some investors stopped receiving
returns  and  it  appears  Hamdan  stopped  paying  any  returns  by  October  2011.    Throughout  the
remainder of 2011 and 2012, Hamdan continually provided various false excuses to investors for
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 2
Complaint

his failure to pay promised returns, even as he continued to solicit new funds.  Hamdan received
new  funds  from  existing  investors  at  least  as  recently  as  January  2012,  and  in  December  2012,
told investors he was expecting up to $700,000 in investments to start a new trading venture.
5. By engaging in the conduct described in this Complaint, Hamdan has engaged in
a fraudulent scheme and has made materially false and misleading statements, in connection with
the purchase of securities, and thus has violated and may be continuing to violate, the anti-fraud
provisions  of  the  federal  securities  laws,  including  specifically  Section  17(a)  of  the  Securities
Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)] and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act  of  1934  (“Exchange  Act”)  [15  U.S.C.  §  78j(b)]  and  Rule  10b-5  [17  C.F.R.  §  240.10b-5]
thereunder.
6.
The  Commission  asks  the  Court  to  enter:  (  1)  a  temporary,  preliminary,  and  permanent
injunction  restraining  and  enjoining  Hamdan;  (2)  an  order  directing  Hamdan  to  disgorge  all  ill-gotten
gains, with prejudgment interest; and (3) an order directing Hamdan to pay civil penalties.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7. The investments offered and sold by Hamdan are “securities” under Section 2(1)
of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77(b)1)] and Section 3(a)(10) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C.
§ 78c(a)(10)].
8. The  Commission  brings  this  action  under  the  authority  conferred  upon  it  by
Section 20(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(b)] and Section 21(d) of the Exchange Act
[15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)] to temporarily, preliminarily, and permanently enjoin Hamdan from future
violations of the federal securities laws.
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 3
Complaint

9. This  Court  has  jurisdiction  over  this  action  under  Section  22(a)  of  the  Securities
Act  of  1933  [15  U.S.C.  §  77v(a)]  and  Section  27  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934  [15
U.S.C. §§ 78u(e) and 78aa].
10. Hamdan  has,  directly  or  indirectly,  made  use  of  the  mails  and  of  the  means  and
instrumentalities of interstate commerce in connection with the acts, transactions, practices, and
courses of business described in this Complaint.
11. Venue  is  proper  in  this  district  because  certain  of  the  acts,  transactions,  practices,
and  courses  of  business  constituting  the  violations  alleged  in  this  Complaint  occurred  in  the
Southern District of Texas and certain of the victims are located in this district.
PARTIES
12. Firas A. Hamdan, age 49, resides in Houston, Texas.  His last known residence is
1407 Meadow Rue Court, Sugar Land, Texas 77479.  Hamdan does business under the name of
FAH Capital Partners, although FAH Capital Partners is not registered with the State of Texas as
an entity or D/B/A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
I. The Defendant
13. Hamdan is well-known in the Houston-area Lebanese and Druze communities and
has enjoyed a reputation as a successful day trader.  He is also a former treasurer of the Houston
branch  of  the  American  Druze  Society  (“ADS”),  a  non-profit  cultural  organization  to  which
many Houston-area members of the Druze religion belong.
II. The Managed Private Portfolio
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 4
Complaint

14.  Beginning  in  approximately  June  2007,  Hamdan  started  operating  a  trading
vehicle  with  investors’  funds,  which  he  describes  as  a  managed  private  portfolio  (“MPP”).
According to Hamdan, the MPP eventually had a total of 33 investors, and as of December 2012,
the  MPP  had  29  investors.    Hamdan  told  the  Commission  staff  that  the  MPP’s  33  investors
invested  a  total  of  approximately  $6.1  million  with  him,  but  as  of  December  2012,  all  investor
funds were depleted.  Hamdan estimated that approximately $3 million of the $6.1 million total
funds  invested  had  been  paid  back  to  investors;  $100,000  had  been  “loaned”  to  him  for  his
personal living expenses; $1.5 million represented market losses; and the remaining $1.5 million
could not be accounted for.  The Commission staff has not been able to verify these statements
by Hamdan, but for purposes of this Complaint, assumes that he had at least $6.1 million under
management,  raised  money  from  at  least  33  investors  and  that  he  cannot  account  for  at  least
$1.5 million.
15.  Hamdan  found  investors  for  the  MPP,  among  other  ways,  by  talking  with  his
friends  and  family,  particularly  those  in  the  Houston  Lebanese  and/or  Druze  communities.    As
word of his purported success began to spread, he began to solicit and accept investments from
friends  of  friends  and  friends  of  family.    He  also  encouraged  existing  investors  to  solicit  their
friends and family as new investors, and paid at least one investor a “finder’s fee” for identifying
a  new  investor.   It  is  believed  that  most  of  Hamdan’s  investors  are  of  Lebanese  descent  and/or
members of the Druze religion.
16.  Hamdan  told  investors  that  he  had  developed  a  proprietary  trading  algorithm  to
target  consistent  returns  while  minimizing  risk  for  the  MPP  investors.    Hamdan  explained  to
investors that his algorithm was “plugged into” his trading account at TD Ameritrade to further
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 5
Complaint

minimize investor loss.   Hamdan promised investors that, as a result of this algorithm, he could
guarantee  the  fixed  monthly  return  based  on  the  amount  they  invested  with  him.   Hamdan  told
investors  that  he  would  keep  all  trading  profits  he  made  in  excess  of  the  agreed  monthly
distribution and that he would also cover any losses below the agreed monthly distribution.
17. Once investors agreed to make their investments, Hamdan and the investor would
execute  “secured  promissory  notes”  for  the  principal  balance  of  each  investment.    Under  the
promissory notes, Hamdan agreed to pay the investor a fixed monthly distribution for the life of
the  note,  and  agreed  that  the  last  monthly  distribution  payment  would  include  the  investors’
principal  amount.    Although  the  precise  terms  of  the  notes  appear  to  vary  among  investors,  the
notes  generally  provide  for  returns  of  approximately  30%  per  year.  In  addition,  in  the
promissory  notes,  Hamdan  expressly  acknowledged  that  the  investor’s  money  was  for  an
investment in the MPP and that he was prohibited from  using  the  investment  proceeds  to  make
the monthly distributions to investors.
18.  After  the  promissory  notes  were  executed,  it  was  Hamdan’s  general  practice  to
instruct investors to wire their principal investment to his personal bank accounts at either Bank
of  America  or  Chase  Bank  or  his  brokerage  account  at  TD  Ameritrade.    It  was  then  Hamdan’s
general practice to transfer most of the investor funds to his personal brokerage accounts at either
TD Ameritrade or Interactive Brokers, LLC (“Interactive Brokers”).  It appears Hamdan would
conduct  all  of  his  trading  activity  under  his  own  name,  rather  than  FAH  or  the  names  of
individual investors.
19.   Hamdan   maintained   and   traded   through   his   personal   brokerage   account   at
TD  Ameritrade  from  1996  until  May  2011.    According  to  Hamdan,  TD  Ameritrade  closed  his
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 6
Complaint

account in May 2011 “because of monitoring activity.”  At the time Hamdan left TD Ameritrade,
his  account  had  a  balance  of  $.02.  After  leaving  TD  Ameritrade,  he  opened  an  account  with
Interactive  Brokers  in  June  2011  with  a  balance  of  $200,000,  but  according  to  Hamdan  that
account was later closed after he was asked to leave the brokerage firm.  At the time Hamdan left
Interactive Brokers in November 2011, his account had negative $6.98 balance.
20.  Brokerage  records  maintained  by  TD  Ameritrade  for  Hamdan’s  account  confirm
that he traded a significant volume of stocks in his 2007 to 2011, but also show that, contrary to
his claims, he was not a successful trader.  Hamdan appears to have deposited about $4.5 million
of  the  $6.1  million  total  investor  funds  into  his  TD  Ameritrade  account,  but  as  reflected  in  the
chart below, he experienced a $1.4 million trading loss from 2007 to 2011:
Year Trading Gain/(Loss)
2007                $                (209,270.81)
2008 $  293,842.62
2009                $                (437,048.82)
2010                $                (437,431.16)
2011                $                (601,597.12)
Total $ (1,391,505.29)
III. Hamdan Entices Investors by Making Various False Representations
A. Hamdan Shows Investors Falsified Brokerage Account Statements
21.  To  solicit  investments  in  the  MPP,  Hamdan  engaged  in  a  series  of  fraudulent
misrepresentations.   Hamdan would solicit potential investors by showing them documents that
purported  to  be  from  his  TD  Ameritrade  brokerage  account.    These  documents  reflected  that
Hamdan  had  a  consistent  history  of  significant  profits  and  significant  assets  under  investment.
The  actual  TD  Ameritrade  records  obtained  by  the  Commission  staff  show  that  Hamdan  was
unable to generate consistent positive returns, and routinely lost money.
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 7
Complaint

22.  A  side-by-side  comparison  of  Hamdan’s  authentic  TD  Ameritrade  records  to  the
records provided by Hamdan to investors show that Hamdan altered the authentic records before
providing them to investors.  For example, Hamdan provided investors with a document that he
alleged was a statement received from TD Ameritrade for the first quarter of 2010.  As reflected
in the document excerpts below, this document listed an opening cash balance of $2,327,970.76,
quarterly trading gains of $2.7 million, and a closing cash balance of $5,148,210.02 for the first
quarter of 2010.  The actual first quarter 2010 statement provided to the Commission staff by TD
Ameritrade, however, shows an opening cash balance of $27,970.76, quarterly trading losses of
$(7,452.80),  and  a  closing  cash  balance  of  only  $148,210.02.    Accordingly,  it  appears  that
Hamdan altered a copy of the actual statement, among other ways, by adding “2,3” to the front of
the opening cash balance and a “5” to the front of the closing cash balance.
Excerpt of fake first quarter 2010 TD Ameritrade Excerpt of real first quarter 2010 TD Ameritrade
statement provided to investors by Hamdan statement for Hamdan’s account
23.  Similarly,  Hamdan  provided  potential  investors  a  purported  TD  Ameritrade
statement  for  the  second  quarter  of  2012  that  listed  an  opening  cash  balance  of  $5,148,210.02,
quarterly  trading  gains  of  $4.2  million,  and  a  closing  cash  balance  of  $6,927,168.88  for  the
second  quarter  of  2010.    The  actual  TD  Ameritrade  statement  for  the  second  quarter  of  2010
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 8
Complaint

reflects  significantly  different  figures.    It  shows  an  opening  cash  balance  of  $148,210.02,
quarterly  trading  losses  of  $(167,329.50),  and  a  closing  cash  balance  of  only  $53.71,  almost
$7 million less than the balance provided by Hamdan in the falsified statement.
Excerpt of fake second quarter 2010 TD Ameritrade Excerpt of real second quarter 2010 TD
statement provided to investors by Hamdan Ameritrade statement for Hamdan’s account
24. As further proof of his trading success, Hamdan provided potential investors with
his  purported  TD  Ameritrade  Realized  Capital  Gain/Loss  Reports  from  2007  to  2010.    These
reports,  which  were  on  TD  Ameritrade  letterhead,  purported  to  show  that  Mr.  Hamdan
experienced  trading  profits  of  $3,964,810.79  in  2007,  $5,718,079.31  in  2008,  $7,412,012.51  in
2009, and $14,119,486.45 in 2010.  In reality, actual TD Ameritrade Realized Capital Gain/Loss
Reports  from  2007  to  2010  provide  that  Hamdan  had  trading  profits  of  -$171,046.70  in  2007,
$279,605.51 in 2008, -$430,004.86 in 2009, and -$475,155.53 in 2010.  In other words, Hamdan
appears to have exaggerated his trading prowess to potential investors by several million dollars.
B. Hamdan Falsely Represents That He Maintains a Cash Reserve Account
25. To further lure investors, starting in  2007,  Hamdan  represented  to  investors  both
before and after they invested that he maintained a separate Cash Reserve Account in which he
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 9
Complaint

kept two-thirds of his available capital at all times.  Hamdan would tell investors that, as a result,
on  a  given  trading  day,  he  was  trading  with  only  one-third  of  his  available  capital,  giving
investors assurance that their capital would not be put at significant risk.  However, there is no
evidence  of  any  Cash  Reserve  Account  under  either  Hamdan’s  or  FAH’s  names,  and  the
Commission staff has concluded that, in all likelihood, such an account does not exist.
C.   Hamdan   Falsely   Represented   That   Investments   Are   Secured   By   an
Insurance Policy
26.  Starting  in  2007,  Hamdan  represented  to  potential,  new  and  existing  investors,
and  some  of  the  promissory  notes  reviewed  by  the  Commission’s  staff  provide,  that  investors’
funds  were  secured  with  beneficiary  rights  in  a  $5  million  key  man  insurance  policy  held  by
Hamdan  at  Northwestern  Mutual.    However,  Northwestern  Mutual  records  show  that  although
Northwestern  had  entered  into  a  life  insurance  contract  with  Hamdan,  no  beneficiaries  were
listed  in  the  contract  and  the  policy  was  never  issued.    The  contract  was  terminated  by
Northwestern Mutual on February 21, 2011.
D. Hamdan Falsely Represented That J. Kyle Bass Was an Investor
27.  Starting  in  at  least  2010,  Hamdan  also  enticed  investors  by  representing  to  them
that  he  had  received  a  $1  million  investment  from  J.  Kyle  Bass,  the  founder  and  principal  of
Hayman  Capital  LP  (“Hayman  Capital”),  a  well-known  Dallas-based  hedge  fund.    Further,
Hamdan told investors that Mr. Bass had agreed to place a second $1 million under investment if
Hamdan  continued  to  successfully  generate  the  promised  returns.    Despite  these  claims,
representatives  of  Mr.  Bass  have  confirmed  that  that  Mr.  Bass  has  no  knowledge  of  either
Hamdan  or  FAH  and  Mr.  Bass  never  invested  with  Hamdan,  either  individually  or  through
Hayman Capital.
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 10
Complaint

IV. Hamdan’s Scheme Begins To Unravel
28. Based on his consistent trading losses and the Commission’s staff’s understanding
of the returns Hamdan did pay to investors, Hamdan could not have paid investors from profits
generated  through  his  trading  activity  or  through  the  remaining  investor  principal  balance.
Instead,  it  appears  that  he  used  new  investor  funds  to  make  the  required  monthly  distribution
payments.  It appears that Hamdan stopped paying some investors as early as 2009, and last paid
any returns in the fall of 2011.
29.  After  Hamdan  stopped  making  all  monthly  distribution  payments  in  the  fall  of
2011, Hamdan began offering several excuses as to why he could no longer make the distribution
payments or access the purported Cash Reserve Account.  Hamdan told investors that he held an
account  at  the  commodities  brokerage  firm  MF  Global  that  he  used  as  collateral  for  a  credit
default  swap  on  Greek  sovereign  debt  that  he  had  purchased  through  an  account  he  held  at
Goldman  Sachs.    Hamdan  told  investors  that  after  MF  Global  filed  for  bankruptcy  in  or  about
October  2011,  Goldman  Sachs  asked  him  to  re-collateralize  the  debt  using  his  TD  Ameritrade
trading account as collateral and that, as a result, he was unable to remove the funds from his TD
Ameritrade  account.    Further,  on  December  8,  2011,  Hamdan  sent  an  email  to  his  investors
addressing  the  lack  of  customer  distributions,  explaining  that  the  MF  Global  bankruptcy  had
frozen  his  cash  reserve  account  and  that  this  was  preventing  him  from  making  regular
distribution  payments.    All  of  these  statements  and  excuses  were  a  complete  fiction.    In
December 2012, Hamdan informed the Commission’s staff that he has never held accounts with
MF Global or Goldman Sachs.  MF Global and Goldman Sachs have also confirmed that no such
accounts exist.
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 11
Complaint

30. In the summer of 2012, Hamdan represented to investors that  he  was  being  sued
in  federal  court  in  Dallas,  Texas  by  Kyle  Bass  of  Hayman  Capital  and  that  his  trading  account
was  therefore  “locked  up,”  preventing  him  from  making  monthly  distribution  payments  to
investors.  However, there is no record of, and Hayman Capital has confirmed, that neither Mr.
Bass nor Hayman Capital was ever involved in any lawsuit with Hamdan.
V. Hamdan Has Continued to Solicit Investments
31.  Even  after  Hamdan  stopped  paying  monthly  returns  in  the  fall  of  2011,  he
continued to solicit new funds from existing investors in his promissory note scheme.  In January
2012, he received a $25,000 additional investment from an existing investor.  Throughout 2012,
Hamdan sent at least one investor text messages, discussing his solicitation of new investments.
He  also  told  another  investor’s  counsel  that  he  was  anticipating  a  new  investment  of  $700,000
from overseas investors, which he said he would use for a new trading program.
32. On or about December 21, 2012, upon being contacted by the Commission staff,
Hamdan  promised  in  writing  that  he  would  stop  soliciting  any  funds  of  any  kind  from  existing
and  potential  investors.    However,  in  specific  contradiction  to  his  representations,  Hamdan
immediately  started  soliciting  new  funds  from  current  investors,  purportedly  to  fund  his  legal
defense.  Most recently, Hamdan has continued to lie to investors by telling them he is unable to
make monthly distribution payments because he is under investigation by the Commission.
CLAIMS
FIRST CLAIM

Violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act

33.  The  Commission  repeats  and  incorporates  paragraphs  1  through  32  of  this
Complaint as if set forth verbatim.
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 12
Complaint

34. Hamdan, directly or indirectly, singly, in concert with others, in the offer and sale
of  securities,  by  use  of  the  means  and  instruments  of  transportation  and  communication  in
interstate commerce and by use of the mails, has:  (a) employed devices, schemes or artifices to
defraud;    (b)  obtained  money  or  property  by  means  of  untrue  statements  of  material  fact  or
omissions to state material facts necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances  under  which  he  were  made,  not  misleading;  and  (c)  engaged  in  transactions,
practices or courses of business which operate or would operate as a fraud or deceit.
35.  Hamdan  engaged  in  the  above-referenced  conduct,  knowingly  or  with  severe
recklessness.    Hamdan  was  also  negligent  in  his  actions  regarding  the  representations  and
omissions alleged herein.
36.  For  these  reasons,  Hamdan  violated,  and  unless  restrained  and  enjoined,  will
continue to violate Section 17(a) of the Securities Act.
SECOND CLAIM

Violation of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5

37.  The  Commission  repeats  and  incorporates  paragraphs  1  through  32  of  this
Complaint by reference.
38.  Hamdan,  directly  or  indirectly,  singly  or  in  concert  with  others,  in  connection
with  the  purchase  and  sale  of  securities,  by  use  of  the  means  and  instrumentalities  of  interstate
commerce and by use of the mails have:  (a) employed devices, schemes and artifices to defraud;
(b) made untrue statements of material facts and omitted to state material facts necessary in order
to  make  the  statements  made,  in  light  of  the  circumstances  under  which  they  were  made,  not
misleading; and  (c) engaged in acts, practices and courses of business which operate as a fraud
and deceit upon purchasers, prospective purchasers and other persons.
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 13
Complaint

39.  Hamdan  engaged  in  the  above-referenced  conduct,  intentionally,  knowingly  or
with severe recklessness regarding the truth.
40.  For  these  reasons,  Hamdan  violated  and,  unless  restrained  and  enjoined,  will
continue to violate Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.
RELIEF REQUESTED
The Commission seeks the following relief:
1) An order of the Court that temporarily, preliminarily, and permanently restrains
and enjoins Hamdan, and, as appropriate, his agents, servants, employees, attorneys and all
persons in active concert or participation with him who receive actual notice of the injunction by
personal service or otherwise, and each of them, from future violations of Section 17(a) of the
Securities Act, Section 10(b) the Exchange Act, and of Rule 10b-5 and from directly or
indirectly soliciting or accepting funds from any person or entity for any unregistered offering of
securities.
2) An order of the Court directing Hamdan to disgorge an amount equal to the funds
and benefits he obtained illegally as a result of the violations alleged, plus prejudgment interest
on that amount.
3) An order of the Court directing Hamdan to pay civil monetary penalties under
Section 20(d) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(d)] and Section 21(d) of the Exchange Act
[15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)] for his violations of the federal securities laws.
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 14
Complaint

4) Such further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
Dated:            January            29,            2013                                                Respectfully            Submitted,
s/ Bret Helmer
                                                                                    BRET            HELMER
       Attorney-in-Charge
       Texas Bar No. 00793931
       S.D. Texas Bar No. 1505312
       TOBY M. GALLOWAY
                                                                                    Texas            Bar            No.            00790733
       S.D. Texas Bar No. 18947
United States Securities and Exchange
Commission
                                                                                    Burnett            Plaza,            Suite            1900
                                                                                    801            Cherry            Street,            Unit            18
                                                                                    Fort            Worth,            Texas            76102
                                                                                    Telephone:            (817)            978-6477            (Helmer)
                                                                                    Fax:            (817)            978-4927
[email protected]
OF COUNSEL:
JONATHAN P. SCOTT
D.C. Bar No. 456930
MARK T. PITTMAN
Texas Bar No. 24013338
TIMOTHY L. EVANS
Texas Bar No. 24065211
United States Securities and Exchange
Commission
Burnett Plaza, Suite 1900
801 Cherry Street, Unit 18
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
       ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 15
Complaint

Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 1 of 15 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 

HOUSTON DIVISION 


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, § 

§ 


Plaintiff,  §
 
§ 


v. § Case No.: 4:13-CV-215 
§
 

FIRAS A. HAMDAN, Individually and § 

Doing Business as FAH CAPITAL PARTNERS, § 


§
 
Defendant, § 


§
 

COMPLAINT 

Plaintiff, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”), 

files this Complaint and seeks emergency relief to halt an ongoing offering fraud conducted by 

Defendant, Firas A. Hamdan, individually and doing business as FAH Capital Partners 

(collectively, “Hamdan”), and alleges: 

SUMMARY 

1. Since 2007, Hamdan has illegally raised at least $6.1 million from at least 

33 investors by offering and selling fraudulent investments based on highly exaggerated claims 

about his prowess as a day trader in listed securities.  Hamdan has targeted the fraud at fellow 

members of Houston’s Lebanese and Druze communities.  Hamdan pitched his program by 

telling potential investors that he would pool their funds with his own funds, and those of other 

investors, in a brokerage account. He claimed that he would then use the combined funds to day 

trade using a proprietary algorithm that had proven success and limited risk and pay them 

guaranteed fixed annual returns of 30% or more.  To lure investors, Hamdan used, among other 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 2 of 15 

things, false brokerage documents allegedly demonstrating his past success.  He also assured 

potential investors their principal was fully secured.  However, the claims Hamdan made to 

entice investors and his promises of limited risk guaranteed returns were pure fiction.   

2. To support his claims of the past success and limited risk of his program, Hamdan 

made several false claims to potential investors.  For example: (a) he shared falsified TD 

Ameritrade, Inc. (“TD Ameritrade”) brokerage records that drastically overstated his trading 

gains and assets under management; (b) he lied to investors about the existence and use of a so-

called cash reserve account (“Cash Reserve Account”) that limited his at-risk capital; (c) he 

falsely represented to potential investors that their investment was secured by a $5 million “key-

man” insurance policy issued by Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co. (“Northwestern 

Mutual”); and (d) he falsely claimed that at least one well-known Dallas hedge-fund manager 

had made a million-dollar investment in the MPP and had promised to invest more.   

3. Although Hamdan did day trade at least some of the investors’ funds in his 

brokerage account, he was anything but successful.  Between 2007 and 2011, during most of 

which time he continued to raise funds from investors, Hamdan lost almost $1.5 million through 

trading activity. His trading patterns show that he lost money consistently throughout these 

years and thus could not have generated sufficient returns to fund the monthly distributions he 

was making to investors. 

4. Despite his tremendous losses, Hamdan continued to solicit new money from 

investors throughout 2012. Starting as early as 2009, however, some investors stopped receiving 

returns and it appears Hamdan stopped paying any returns by October 2011.  Throughout the 

remainder of 2011 and 2012, Hamdan continually provided various false excuses to investors for 

SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 2 
Complaint 



 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 3 of 15 

his failure to pay promised returns, even as he continued to solicit new funds.  Hamdan received 

new funds from existing investors at least as recently as January 2012, and in December 2012, 

told investors he was expecting up to $700,000 in investments to start a new trading venture.   

5. By engaging in the conduct described in this Complaint, Hamdan has engaged in 

a fraudulent scheme and has made materially false and misleading statements, in connection with 

the purchase of securities, and thus has violated and may be continuing to violate, the anti-fraud 

provisions of the federal securities laws, including specifically Section 17(a) of the Securities 

Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)] and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange 

Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5] 

thereunder. 

6. The Commission asks the Court to enter: ( 1) a temporary, preliminary, and permanent 

injunction restraining and enjoining Hamdan; (2) an order directing Hamdan to disgorge all ill-gotten 

gains, with prejudgment interest; and (3) an order directing Hamdan to pay civil penalties. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

7. The investments offered and sold by Hamdan are “securities” under Section 2(1) 

of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77(b)1)] and Section 3(a)(10) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 

§ 78c(a)(10)]. 

8. The Commission brings this action under the authority conferred upon it by 

Section 20(b) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(b)] and Section 21(d) of the Exchange Act 

[15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)] to temporarily, preliminarily, and permanently enjoin Hamdan from future 

violations of the federal securities laws. 

SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 3 
Complaint 



 

 

  

  

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 4 of 15 

9. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under Section 22(a) of the Securities 

Act of 1933 [15 U.S.C. § 77v(a)] and Section 27 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 [15 

U.S.C. §§ 78u(e) and 78aa]. 

10. Hamdan has, directly or indirectly, made use of the mails and of the means and 

instrumentalities of interstate commerce in connection with the acts, transactions, practices, and 

courses of business described in this Complaint.   

11. Venue is proper in this district because certain of the acts, transactions, practices, 

and courses of business constituting the violations alleged in this Complaint occurred in the 

Southern District of Texas and certain of the victims are located in this district. 

PARTIES 

12. Firas A. Hamdan, age 49, resides in Houston, Texas.  His last known residence is 

1407 Meadow Rue Court, Sugar Land, Texas 77479. Hamdan does business under the name of 

FAH Capital Partners, although FAH Capital Partners is not registered with the State of Texas as 

an entity or D/B/A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS 

I. The Defendant 

13. Hamdan is well-known in the Houston-area Lebanese and Druze communities and 

has enjoyed a reputation as a successful day trader.  He is also a former treasurer of the Houston 

branch of the American Druze Society (“ADS”), a non-profit cultural organization to which 

many Houston-area members of the Druze religion belong. 

II. The Managed Private Portfolio 

SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 4 
Complaint 



 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 5 of 15 

14. Beginning in approximately June 2007, Hamdan started operating a trading 

vehicle with investors’ funds, which he describes as a managed private portfolio (“MPP”). 

According to Hamdan, the MPP eventually had a total of 33 investors, and as of December 2012, 

the MPP had 29 investors.  Hamdan told the Commission staff that the MPP’s 33 investors 

invested a total of approximately $6.1 million with him, but as of December 2012, all investor 

funds were depleted. Hamdan estimated that approximately $3 million of the $6.1 million total 

funds invested had been paid back to investors; $100,000 had been “loaned” to him for his 

personal living expenses; $1.5 million represented market losses; and the remaining $1.5 million 

could not be accounted for. The Commission staff has not been able to verify these statements 

by Hamdan, but for purposes of this Complaint, assumes that he had at least $6.1 million under 

management, raised money from at least 33 investors and that he cannot account for at least 

$1.5 million. 

15. Hamdan found investors for the MPP, among other ways, by talking with his 

friends and family, particularly those in the Houston Lebanese and/or Druze communities.  As 

word of his purported success began to spread, he began to solicit and accept investments from 

friends of friends and friends of family.  He also encouraged existing investors to solicit their 

friends and family as new investors, and paid at least one investor a “finder’s fee” for identifying 

a new investor. It is believed that most of Hamdan’s investors are of Lebanese descent and/or 

members of the Druze religion. 

16. Hamdan told investors that he had developed a proprietary trading algorithm to 

target consistent returns while minimizing risk for the MPP investors.  Hamdan explained to 

investors that his algorithm was “plugged into” his trading account at TD Ameritrade to further 

SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 5 
Complaint 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 6 of 15 

minimize investor loss.  Hamdan promised investors that, as a result of this algorithm, he could 

guarantee the fixed monthly return based on the amount they invested with him.  Hamdan told 

investors that he would keep all trading profits he made in excess of the agreed monthly 

distribution and that he would also cover any losses below the agreed monthly distribution.   

17. Once investors agreed to make their investments, Hamdan and the investor would 

execute “secured promissory notes” for the principal balance of each investment.  Under the 

promissory notes, Hamdan agreed to pay the investor a fixed monthly distribution for the life of 

the note, and agreed that the last monthly distribution payment would include the investors’ 

principal amount.  Although the precise terms of the notes appear to vary among investors, the 

notes generally provide for returns of approximately 30% per year. In addition, in the 

promissory notes, Hamdan expressly acknowledged that the investor’s money was for an 

investment in the MPP and that he was prohibited from using the investment proceeds to make 

the monthly distributions to investors.  

18. After the promissory notes were executed, it was Hamdan’s general practice to 

instruct investors to wire their principal investment to his personal bank accounts at either Bank 

of America or Chase Bank or his brokerage account at TD Ameritrade.  It was then Hamdan’s 

general practice to transfer most of the investor funds to his personal brokerage accounts at either 

TD Ameritrade or Interactive Brokers, LLC (“Interactive Brokers”).  It appears Hamdan would 

conduct all of his trading activity under his own name, rather than FAH or the names of 

individual investors. 

19. Hamdan maintained and traded through his personal brokerage account at 

TD Ameritrade from 1996 until May 2011.  According to Hamdan, TD Ameritrade closed his 

SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 6 
Complaint 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

  

 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 7 of 15 

account in May 2011 “because of monitoring activity.”  At the time Hamdan left TD Ameritrade, 

his account had a balance of $.02. After leaving TD Ameritrade, he opened an account with 

Interactive Brokers in June 2011 with a balance of $200,000, but according to Hamdan that 

account was later closed after he was asked to leave the brokerage firm.  At the time Hamdan left 

Interactive Brokers in November 2011, his account had negative $6.98 balance.   

20. Brokerage records maintained by TD Ameritrade for Hamdan’s account confirm 

that he traded a significant volume of stocks in his 2007 to 2011, but also show that, contrary to 

his claims, he was not a successful trader.  Hamdan appears to have deposited about $4.5 million 

of the $6.1 million total investor funds into his TD Ameritrade account, but as reflected in the 

chart below, he experienced a $1.4 million trading loss from 2007 to 2011: 

Year Trading Gain/(Loss) 
2007 $ (209,270.81) 
2008 $ 293,842.62 
2009 $ (437,048.82) 
2010 $ (437,431.16) 
2011 $ (601,597.12) 

Total $ (1,391,505.29) 

III. Hamdan Entices Investors by Making Various False Representations   

A. Hamdan Shows Investors Falsified Brokerage Account Statements 

21. To solicit investments in the MPP, Hamdan engaged in a series of fraudulent 

misrepresentations.  Hamdan would solicit potential investors by showing them documents that 

purported to be from his TD Ameritrade brokerage account.  These documents reflected that 

Hamdan had a consistent history of significant profits and significant assets under investment. 

The actual TD Ameritrade records obtained by the Commission staff show that Hamdan was 

unable to generate consistent positive returns, and routinely lost money.   
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 7 
Complaint 



 

 

 

 

    

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 8 of 15 

22. A side-by-side comparison of Hamdan’s authentic TD Ameritrade records to the 

records provided by Hamdan to investors show that Hamdan altered the authentic records before 

providing them to investors. For example, Hamdan provided investors with a document that he 

alleged was a statement received from TD Ameritrade for the first quarter of 2010.  As reflected 

in the document excerpts below, this document listed an opening cash balance of $2,327,970.76, 

quarterly trading gains of $2.7 million, and a closing cash balance of $5,148,210.02 for the first 

quarter of 2010. The actual first quarter 2010 statement provided to the Commission staff by TD 

Ameritrade, however, shows an opening cash balance of $27,970.76, quarterly trading losses of 

$(7,452.80), and a closing cash balance of only $148,210.02. Accordingly, it appears that 

Hamdan altered a copy of the actual statement, among other ways, by adding “2,3” to the front of 

the opening cash balance and a “5” to the front of the closing cash balance. 

Excerpt of fake first quarter 2010 TD Ameritrade Excerpt of real first quarter 2010 TD Ameritrade 
statement provided to investors by Hamdan statement for Hamdan’s account 

23. Similarly, Hamdan provided potential investors a purported TD Ameritrade 

statement for the second quarter of 2012 that listed an opening cash balance of $5,148,210.02, 

quarterly trading gains of $4.2 million, and a closing cash balance of $6,927,168.88 for the 

second quarter of 2010. The actual TD Ameritrade statement for the second quarter of 2010 

SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 8 
Complaint 

http:6,927,168.88
http:5,148,210.02
http:148,210.02
http:7,452.80
http:27,970.76
http:5,148,210.02
http:2,327,970.76


 

 

 

 
   

 

 

 

 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 9 of 15 

reflects significantly different figures.  It shows an opening cash balance of $148,210.02, 

quarterly trading losses of $(167,329.50), and a closing cash balance of only $53.71, almost 

$7 million less than the balance provided by Hamdan in the falsified statement. 

Excerpt of fake second quarter 2010 TD Ameritrade Excerpt of real second quarter 2010 TD 
statement provided to investors by Hamdan Ameritrade statement for Hamdan’s account 

24. As further proof of his trading success, Hamdan provided potential investors with 

his purported TD Ameritrade Realized Capital Gain/Loss Reports from 2007 to 2010.  These 

reports, which were on TD Ameritrade letterhead, purported to show that Mr. Hamdan 

experienced trading profits of $3,964,810.79 in 2007, $5,718,079.31 in 2008, $7,412,012.51 in 

2009, and $14,119,486.45 in 2010. In reality, actual TD Ameritrade Realized Capital Gain/Loss 

Reports from 2007 to 2010 provide that Hamdan had trading profits of -$171,046.70 in 2007, 

$279,605.51 in 2008, -$430,004.86 in 2009, and -$475,155.53 in 2010.  In other words, Hamdan 

appears to have exaggerated his trading prowess to potential investors by several million dollars. 

B. Hamdan Falsely Represents That He Maintains a Cash Reserve Account 

25. To further lure investors, starting in 2007, Hamdan represented to investors both 

before and after they invested that he maintained a separate Cash Reserve Account in which he 

SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 9 
Complaint 

http:475,155.53
http:430,004.86
http:279,605.51
http:171,046.70
http:14,119,486.45
http:7,412,012.51
http:5,718,079.31
http:3,964,810.79
http:167,329.50
http:148,210.02


 

  

 
 

 
  

 

 

 

  

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 10 of 15 

kept two-thirds of his available capital at all times.  Hamdan would tell investors that, as a result, 

on a given trading day, he was trading with only one-third of his available capital, giving 

investors assurance that their capital would not be put at significant risk.  However, there is no 

evidence of any Cash Reserve Account under either Hamdan’s or FAH’s names, and the 

Commission staff has concluded that, in all likelihood, such an account does not exist.   

C. Hamdan Falsely Represented That Investments Are Secured By an 
Insurance Policy 

26. Starting in 2007, Hamdan represented to potential, new and existing investors, 

and some of the promissory notes reviewed by the Commission’s staff provide, that investors’ 

funds were secured with beneficiary rights in a $5 million key man insurance policy held by 

Hamdan at Northwestern Mutual.  However, Northwestern Mutual records show that although 

Northwestern had entered into a life insurance contract with Hamdan, no beneficiaries were 

listed in the contract and the policy was never issued.  The contract was terminated by 

Northwestern Mutual on February 21, 2011. 

D. Hamdan Falsely Represented That J. Kyle Bass Was an Investor 

27. Starting in at least 2010, Hamdan also enticed investors by representing to them 

that he had received a $1 million investment from J. Kyle Bass, the founder and principal of 

Hayman Capital LP (“Hayman Capital”), a well-known Dallas-based hedge fund.  Further, 

Hamdan told investors that Mr. Bass had agreed to place a second $1 million under investment if 

Hamdan continued to successfully generate the promised returns.  Despite these claims, 

representatives of Mr. Bass have confirmed that that Mr. Bass has no knowledge of either 

Hamdan or FAH and Mr. Bass never invested with Hamdan, either individually or through 

Hayman Capital.   
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 10 
Complaint 



 

  

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 11 of 15 

IV. Hamdan’s Scheme Begins To Unravel 

28. Based on his consistent trading losses and the Commission’s staff’s understanding 

of the returns Hamdan did pay to investors, Hamdan could not have paid investors from profits 

generated through his trading activity or through the remaining investor principal balance. 

Instead, it appears that he used new investor funds to make the required monthly distribution 

payments.  It appears that Hamdan stopped paying some investors as early as 2009, and last paid 

any returns in the fall of 2011. 

29. After Hamdan stopped making all monthly distribution payments in the fall of 

2011, Hamdan began offering several excuses as to why he could no longer make the distribution 

payments or access the purported Cash Reserve Account.  Hamdan told investors that he held an 

account at the commodities brokerage firm MF Global that he used as collateral for a credit 

default swap on Greek sovereign debt that he had purchased through an account he held at 

Goldman Sachs.  Hamdan told investors that after MF Global filed for bankruptcy in or about 

October 2011, Goldman Sachs asked him to re-collateralize the debt using his TD Ameritrade 

trading account as collateral and that, as a result, he was unable to remove the funds from his TD 

Ameritrade account.  Further, on December 8, 2011, Hamdan sent an email to his investors 

addressing the lack of customer distributions, explaining that the MF Global bankruptcy had 

frozen his cash reserve account and that this was preventing him from making regular 

distribution payments.  All of these statements and excuses were a complete fiction.  In 

December 2012, Hamdan informed the Commission’s staff that he has never held accounts with 

MF Global or Goldman Sachs.  MF Global and Goldman Sachs have also confirmed that no such 

accounts exist. 

SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 11 
Complaint 



 

  

 

 

 

 

  

 
 

 

 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 12 of 15 

30. In the summer of 2012, Hamdan represented to investors that he was being sued 

in federal court in Dallas, Texas by Kyle Bass of Hayman Capital and that his trading account 

was therefore “locked up,” preventing him from making monthly distribution payments to 

investors. However, there is no record of, and Hayman Capital has confirmed, that neither Mr. 

Bass nor Hayman Capital was ever involved in any lawsuit with Hamdan. 

V. Hamdan Has Continued to Solicit Investments      

31. Even after Hamdan stopped paying monthly returns in the fall of 2011, he 

continued to solicit new funds from existing investors in his promissory note scheme.  In January 

2012, he received a $25,000 additional investment from an existing investor.  Throughout 2012, 

Hamdan sent at least one investor text messages, discussing his solicitation of new investments. 

He also told another investor’s counsel that he was anticipating a new investment of $700,000 

from overseas investors, which he said he would use for a new trading program.   

32. On or about December 21, 2012, upon being contacted by the Commission staff, 

Hamdan promised in writing that he would stop soliciting any funds of any kind from existing 

and potential investors.  However, in specific contradiction to his representations, Hamdan 

immediately started soliciting new funds from current investors, purportedly to fund his legal 

defense. Most recently, Hamdan has continued to lie to investors by telling them he is unable to 

make monthly distribution payments because he is under investigation by the Commission.  

CLAIMS 

FIRST CLAIM 

Violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act
 

33. The Commission repeats and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 32 of this 

Complaint as if set forth verbatim. 
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 12 
Complaint 



 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

  

 

  

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 13 of 15 

34. Hamdan, directly or indirectly, singly, in concert with others, in the offer and sale 

of securities, by use of the means and instruments of transportation and communication in 

interstate commerce and by use of the mails, has:  (a) employed devices, schemes or artifices to 

defraud; (b) obtained money or property by means of untrue statements of material fact or 

omissions to state material facts necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the 

circumstances under which he were made, not misleading; and (c) engaged in transactions, 

practices or courses of business which operate or would operate as a fraud or deceit.  

35. Hamdan engaged in the above-referenced conduct, knowingly or with severe 

recklessness.  Hamdan was also negligent in his actions regarding the representations and 

omissions alleged herein. 

36. For these reasons, Hamdan violated, and unless restrained and enjoined, will 

continue to violate Section 17(a) of the Securities Act. 

SECOND CLAIM
 
Violation of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 


37. The Commission repeats and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 32 of this 

Complaint by reference. 

38. Hamdan, directly or indirectly, singly or in concert with others, in connection 

with the purchase and sale of securities, by use of the means and instrumentalities of interstate 

commerce and by use of the mails have:  (a) employed devices, schemes and artifices to defraud; 

(b) made untrue statements of material facts and omitted to state material facts necessary in order 

to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not 

misleading; and  (c) engaged in acts, practices and courses of business which operate as a fraud 

and deceit upon purchasers, prospective purchasers and other persons. 
SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 13 
Complaint 



 

  

 

 

 

 

 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 14 of 15 

39. Hamdan engaged in the above-referenced conduct, intentionally, knowingly or 

with severe recklessness regarding the truth.   

40. For these reasons, Hamdan violated and, unless restrained and enjoined, will 

continue to violate Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.  

RELIEF REQUESTED 

The Commission seeks the following relief: 

1) An order of the Court that temporarily, preliminarily, and permanently restrains 

and enjoins Hamdan, and, as appropriate, his agents, servants, employees, attorneys and all 

persons in active concert or participation with him who receive actual notice of the injunction by 

personal service or otherwise, and each of them, from future violations of Section 17(a) of the 

Securities Act, Section 10(b) the Exchange Act, and of Rule 10b-5 and from directly or 

indirectly soliciting or accepting funds from any person or entity for any unregistered offering of 

securities. 

2)  An order of the Court directing Hamdan to disgorge an amount equal to the funds 

and benefits he obtained illegally as a result of the violations alleged, plus prejudgment interest 

on that amount. 

3) An order of the Court directing Hamdan to pay civil monetary penalties under 

Section 20(d) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. § 77t(d)] and Section 21(d) of the Exchange Act 

[15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)] for his violations of the federal securities laws. 

SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 14 
Complaint 



 

  

 

  

     
 
   
           

 
    

      
   
   

     

 
 

 

 
         

 
 

   
 
 

    Case 4:13-cv-00215 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/29/13 Page 15 of 15 

4) Such further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. 

Dated: January 29, 2013    Respectfully Submitted, 

s/ Bret Helmer
       BRET HELMER 
       Attorney-in-Charge
       Texas  Bar  No.  00793931
       S.D.  Texas  Bar  No.  1505312
       TOBY  M.  GALLOWAY
       Texas Bar No. 00790733 
       S.D.  Texas  Bar  No.  18947  

United States Securities and Exchange 
Commission  

       Burnett Plaza, Suite 1900 
       801 Cherry Street, Unit 18 
       Fort Worth, Texas 76102 
       Telephone: (817) 978-6477 (Helmer) 
       Fax: (817) 978-4927 

[email protected] 
OF COUNSEL: 
JONATHAN P. SCOTT 
D.C. Bar No. 456930 
MARK T. PITTMAN 
Texas Bar No. 24013338 
TIMOTHY L. EVANS 
Texas Bar No. 24065211 
United States Securities and Exchange 
Commission  
Burnett Plaza, Suite 1900 
801 Cherry Street, Unit 18 
Fort Worth, Texas 76102

       ATTORNEYS  FOR  PLAINTIFF  

SEC v. Firas A. Hamdan Page 15 
Complaint