Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

U.S. Securities and Exchange v. Sean Nathan Healy

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA


December 2, 2010

U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, PLAINTIFF
v.
SEAN NATHAN HEALY, DEFENDANT AND SHALESE RANIA HEALY AND SAND DOLLAR INVESTING PARTNERS, LLC, RELIEF DEFENDANTS U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION, PLAINTIFF V. SEAN NATHAN HEALY, DEFENDANT AND SHALESE RANIA HEALY AND SAND DOLLAR INVESTING PARTNERS, LLC, RELIEF DEFENDANTS

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Christopher C. Conner United States District Judge

ORDER

AND NOW, this 2nd day of December, 2010, upon consideration of the motion (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Healy, Civ. A. No. 1:09-CV- 1330 (M.D. Pa. filed July 12, 2009) [hereinafter Case No. 1330], Doc. 121; U.S.

Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Healy, Civ. A. No. 1:09-CV-1331 (M.D. Pa filed July 12, 2009) [hereinafter Case No. 1331], Doc. 118), filed by the court appointed receiver, Melanie E. Damian, Esq. (the "Receiver"), wherein the Receiver

requests that the court approve her proposed claims procedure and plan of distribution of assets recovered by the Estate, and upon further consideration of the Order of Court (Case No. 1330, Doc. 122; Case No. 1331, Doc. 119) dated November

16, 2010, directing any party who opposes the relief sought in the Receiver's motion (Case No. 1330, Doc. 121; Case No. 1331, Doc. 118) to file a brief in opposition to the motion on or before November 30, 2010, and it appearing that, as of the date of this Order, no party has filed a brief in opposition, see L.R. 7.6, and it further appearing that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. Commodity

Futures Trading Commission do not oppose the relief sought in the Receiver's motion, and that the relief requested is in the best interests of the Receivership

Estate, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The motion (Case No. 1330, Doc. 121; Case No. 1331, Doc. 118) is DEEMED unopposed. See L.R. 7.6.

2. The motion (Case No. 1330, Doc. 121; Case No. 1331, Doc. 118) is GRANTED.

a. The claims administration process and plan of distribution proposed in the motion (Case No. 1330, Doc. 121; Case No. 1331, Doc. 118) are approved in their entirety.

b. The forms of the "Legal Notice of Claims Administration Process and Plan of Distribution" and the "Proof of Claim and Release," proposed in and attached as exhibits to the motion (Case No. 1330, Doc. 121; Case No. 1331, Doc. 118), are approved.

c. The Receiver is authorized to mail the claims package, in the form proposed in the motion (Case No. 1330, Doc. 121; Case No. 1331, Doc. 118), including the "Legal Notice of Claims Administration Process and Plan of Distribution" and the "Proof of Claim and Release," to all eligible claimants (as defined in the motion).

d. The Receiver is authorized to commence the claims administration process forthwith.

S/ Christopher C. Conner

20101202

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.