SEC v. Federico Nannini, Mauro Nannini, Alejandro Thermiotis, and Francisco Tonarely (insider trading, 2024)
Alleged — pending
These are allegations. SEC has filed an action; nothing in it has been proven, and the respondents have not been found liable. Everything described on this page is what the regulator alleges, not what a court has found. See our editorial policy.
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 2024, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought an action against Federico Nannini, Mauro Nannini, Alejandro Thermiotis, and Francisco Tonarely, alleging conduct this library classifies as insider trading. No monetary relief has been recorded at this stage; the matter is an allegation and remains unproven. A parallel criminal matter is referenced in the release.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-26108 |
| Date filed | 2024-09-16 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida |
| Status | filed |
| Asset class | equities |
| Criminal parallel | Yes |
| Defendants | Federico Nannini, Mauro Nannini, Alejandro Thermiotis, ; Francisco Tonarely |
| Techniques | Insider trading |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- —
- Alleged gain
- $1.1m
What is alleged to have happened
the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on September 16, 2024 as release LR-26108. The respondents named are Federico Nannini, Mauro Nannini, Alejandro Thermiotis, and Francisco Tonarely (2 individuals, 0 entities). The action was brought in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida.
This library tags the matter as insider trading, 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 conduct is recorded against equities.
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.
This matter is at the allegation stage. Nothing in the regulator's filing has been proven, and the respondents are entitled to the presumption that it has not been. This page will be updated if the matter is resolved, dismissed or withdrawn.
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.
- Insider trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2024-09-16 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.
Related actions
Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.
| Action | Agency | Filed | Technique | Penalty | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEC v. Trijya Vakil and Neeraj Visen (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-09-04 | Insider Trading | — | judgment |
| CFTC v. Gabriel Perez (insider trading, 2026) | CFTC | 2026-08-28 | Insider Trading | $65k | judgment |
| SEC v. Gavin Wolfe and others (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-21 | Insider Trading | — | unknown |
| SEC v. Jesse R. Mitchell (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-21 | Insider Trading | — | filed |
| SEC v. Benjamin Tesfaye (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-08-11 | Insider Trading | — | judgment |
| SEC v. Jamal (“Jimmy”) Chammout and others (insider trading, 2026) | SEC | 2026-07-17 | Insider Trading | $497k | judgment |