This action was dismissed. The allegations described below were not established. This page is kept online so that the outcome is visible alongside the original filing.

SEC v. Benjamin Wey, et al. (reverse merger schemes, 2015)

Dismissed

Machine-extracted, pending human review. The structured fields on this page were parsed automatically from the regulator's own release, linked below. Read the primary document before relying on any figure here, and tell us if something is wrong.

In 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought an action, since dismissed, against Benjamin Wey, et al., alleging conduct this library classifies as reverse merger schemes. The release does not state a monetary figure that we were able to extract. A parallel criminal matter is referenced in the release.

The record

Structured fields for this action, as recorded in our case library.
Agency	SEC
Release number	LR-23342
Date filed	2015-09-10
Status	dismissed
Criminal parallel	Yes
Defendants	Benjamin Wey, et al. (individual)
Techniques	Reverse merger schemes

What was ordered

Civil penalty: —
Disgorgement: —
Prejudgment interest: —
Total relief: —
Alleged gain: —

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on September 10, 2015 as release LR-23342. The respondents named are Benjamin Wey, et al. (1 individual, 0 entities).

This library tags the matter as reverse merger schemes, based on the conduct the regulator describes. Each tag links to a page explaining how that technique works, what statute it engages, and what penalties comparable actions have attracted. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

The release references a parallel criminal proceeding. Where a criminal case exists, the civil and criminal outcomes are recorded separately, because they resolve on different standards of proof.

The action was dismissed. We keep dismissed matters in the library precisely so that the outcome is visible alongside the original allegation.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

Reverse merger schemes — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

2015-09-10 Litigation release published

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

SEC litigation release

The linked release is a work of the United States government and is not subject to copyright. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Action	Agency	Filed	Technique	Penalty	Status
SEC v. Morrie Tobin et al. (reverse merger schemes, 2024)	SEC	2024-10-18	Reverse Merger Schemes	$230k	judgment
SEC v. DiScala et al., (pump and dump, 2024)	SEC	2024-09-20	Pump And Dump , Reverse Merger Schemes	—	judgment
SEC v. Keith D. Beekmeyer and Andrew M. Bye (reverse merger schemes, 2024)	SEC	2024-09-20	Reverse Merger Schemes	—	settled
SEC v. Esmark Inc. and James P. Bouchard (reverse merger schemes, 2024)	SEC	2024-09-06	Reverse Merger Schemes	—	settled
SEC v. Meta Materials, Inc. ( and others (engineered short squeeze, 2024)	SEC	2024-06-25	Engineered Short Squeeze , Paid Stock Promotion +1	$1m	settled
SEC v. Janusz (John) Zukowski and Jerry Samaras (reverse merger schemes, 2024)	SEC	2024-06-13	Reverse Merger Schemes	—	settled

Record added September 8, 2026. submit a correction.