SEC v. Ongkaruck Sripetch, et al. (pump and dump, 2025)
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 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought an action, since dismissed, against Ongkaruck Sripetch, et al., alleging conduct this library classifies as pump and dump and unregistered distributions. The release records disgorgement of $385,890, prejudgment interest of $1.1 million.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | LR-26332 |
| Date filed | 2025-06-20 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, Southern District of California |
| Status | dismissed |
| Asset class | equities |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Bars imposed | officer-and-director bar, penny stock bar |
| Defendants | Ongkaruck Sripetch, et al. |
| Techniques | Pump and dump , Unregistered distributions |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- —
- Disgorgement
- $386k
- Prejudgment interest
- $1.1m
- Total relief
- $1.4m
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on June 20, 2025 as release LR-26332. The respondents named are Ongkaruck Sripetch, et al. (1 individual, 0 entities). The action was brought in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of California.
This library tags the matter as pump and dump and unregistered distributions, 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 relief recorded in our data is disgorgement of $385,890, prejudgment interest of $1.1 million. Penalty and disgorgement are distinct: disgorgement returns the gain, while the penalty is punitive. We store them separately so that aggregate figures across the library are not double-counted.
Non-monetary relief recorded: officer-and-director bar, penny stock bar.
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 2 techniques 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.
- Pump and dump — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
- Unregistered distributions — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
Timeline
- 2025-06-20 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. Wilson-Davis & Co., Inc. (paid stock promotion, 2019) | SEC | 2019-05-15 | Paid Stock Promotion , Pump And Dump +1 | — | settled |
| SEC v. Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. (pump and dump, 2015) | SEC | 2015-01-27 | Pump And Dump , Unregistered Distributions | — | filed |
| SEC v. Michael J. Forster (pump and dump, 2026) | SEC | 2026-07-15 | Pump And Dump | — | judgment |
| SEC v. Stephen J. Czarnik (paid stock promotion, 2026) | SEC | 2026-06-29 | Paid Stock Promotion , Unregistered Distributions | — | judgment |
| SEC v. George John Drazenovic, CPA (pump and dump, 2026) | SEC | 2026-04-20 | Pump And Dump | — | judgment |
| SEC v. Geoffrey Allen Wall (pump and dump, 2026) | SEC | 2026-04-09 | Pump And Dump | — | judgment |