Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Alexandre
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:22-cv-03822
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 20
In Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Alexandre, Judge Caproni denied Alexandre’s challenge to the receiver’s report and fees and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
Eddy Alexandre, the court-appointed receiver, and the EminiFX receivership estate; the order addressed the receiver’s status report, payment application, and Alexandre’s request to appeal without paying filing fees.
What happened
In Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Alexandre, Eddy Alexandre, representing himself, challenged the receiver’s Ninth Status Report and request for payment. He argued that the receiver’s reports were defective, invoices were improperly kept secret, and the fees were unreasonable.
Alexandre asked the court to reject the report, undo its approval of the payment application, deny the requested fees, and require standardized financial reports with unsealed invoices. He also disputed the receiver’s handling of EminiFX’s assets and alleged that the receivership caused losses and denied him and investors a meaningful opportunity to be heard.
Judge Valerie Caproni denied the application. She found that the receiver’s work adequately described the receivership’s operations and that the requested fees were reasonable given the complexity of the work. The court also denied permission for Alexandre to proceed without paying filing fees on an immediate appeal, finding that such an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Alexandre · No. 1:22-cv-03822
- Valerie Caproni
- Oct. 21, 2024
Background
Eddy Alexandre, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a motion opposing the receiver’s Second Quarter 2024, or Ninth, Status Report and seeking to vacate approval of the receiver’s application for payment. The filing concerned the receivership established in the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s civil enforcement case involving Alexandre and EminiFX.
Alexandre argued that the receiver’s financial reports were incomplete and described as “illustrative” rather than prepared under generally accepted accounting principles. He also objected to invoices being filed under seal, arguing that this prevented him from reviewing and opposing the requested payments. His filing challenged the receiver’s management and liquidation of EminiFX assets, alleged conflicts of interest and due-process violations, and asserted that the receivership had caused losses affecting EminiFX, its investors, and Alexandre.
Requests and the Court’s Ruling
Alexandre asked the court to reject the Ninth Status Report, vacate the order approving the payment application, deny the fee request, and require the receiver to provide standardized financial reports and unsealed invoices.
The court stated that it had reviewed the receiver’s work product and found that it adequately reported the status of the receiver’s operations. It also found that the fee request was reasonable in light of the complex nature of the work performed. The court therefore denied the application.
The court further stated that Alexandre had pleaded guilty in the related criminal case to defrauding investors and therefore could not present himself as the guardian of their best interests. It said that it did not need to consider Alexandre’s preferences when evaluating the receiver’s work. The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an immediate appeal of the order would not be taken in good faith, and it denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees on such an appeal.
Disposition
The application was denied. Permission to proceed without paying filing fees on an immediate appeal was also denied.
Read the full 20-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.