United States v. 2020-10-13 | 19-35556 | USSEC V. ROBERT MORANO | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

1
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

U.S. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ROBERT M. MORANO,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 19-35556

D.C. No. 3:18-cv-00386-HZ

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Marco A. Hernandez, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 8, 2020
**

San Francisco, California

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and HAWKINS and McKEOWN, Circuit
Judges.

Robert M. Morano (“Morano”) appeals pro se the imposition of a civil penalty
for his admitted insider trading in violation of Sections 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Exchange Act

*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED

OCT 13 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

2
Rule 10b-5(b), 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5(b). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §
1291 and affirm.
Morano’s consent judgment resolved all issues of liability, leaving only a
determination whether a civil penalty should be imposed and, if so, in what amount.
The Securities & Exchange Commission (“SEC”) argued for a penalty of three times
the amount of insider trading gain. The district court imposed a penalty of $75,000,
or twice the gain.
Reviewing for abuse of discretion, SEC v. Platforms Wireless Int’l Corp., 617
F.3d 1072, 1098 (9th

Cir. 2010), the determination to impose a civil penalty and
calculation of its amount were reasonable given Morano’s admitted misuse of insider
information and his admission that he had engaged in similar conduct in the past.
AFFIRMED.