Legal Opinion
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. E-Smart Technologies, Inc.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided November 21, 2014No. Civil Action No. 2011-0895PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JAMES E. BOASBERG, United States District Judge
In this civil-enforcement action, the Securities and Exchange Commission alleges that e-Smart Technologies, Inc., a public company, was a sham. While it purported to be at the cutting edge of developing and manufacturing a biometric “smart” card, such claims, according to the Commission, were bogus. Instead, pro se Defendant Mary Grace (the company’s CEO) and others repeatedly misrepresented the cards’ capabilities and e-Smart’s success to induce investors to part with their money. That money, in turn, was used to subsidize…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Scott v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Basic Inc. v. LevinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Jacobson v. HofgardDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. ThompsonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2017
- In re Galena Biopharma, Inc. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2015
- U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. E-Smart Technologies, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- United States Securities & Exchange Commission v. UstianDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2017
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.