Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 19, 2026

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Francisley Valdevino Da Silva

Full caption

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Francisley Valdevino Da Silva, Ramon Antonio Perez Arias, Juan Antonio Tacuri Fajardo, and Jose Ramiro Coronado Reyes

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:22-cv-10534
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3

Counsel3 of record
PLAINTIFF
Hane Lee Kim U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Shannon A. Keyes U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Thomas Peter Smith U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.

Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Securities and Exchange Commission v. Da Silva, Judge Torres granted Juan Tacuri’s requests for volunteer counsel and permission to proceed as unable to afford counsel for settlement.

Who this affects

Juan Tacuri, whose request for limited volunteer representation for settlement and permission to proceed as unable to afford counsel were granted; any volunteer lawyer would have duties limited to the scope described in the order.

What happened

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Francisley Valdevino Da Silva, Ramon Antonio Perez Arias, Juan Antonio Tacuri Fajardo, and Jose Ramiro Coronado Reyes is an enforcement case involving an alleged cryptocurrency pyramid scheme. The court had stayed the case while related criminal proceedings ended, but settlement discussions could continue.

Juan Tacuri asked for a volunteer lawyer. The court found that he could not afford counsel, was incarcerated, and spoke limited English, which made it difficult for him to participate in settlement discussions with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The requested representation would be limited because discovery and other deadlines remained stayed.

Judge Torres granted Tacuri’s requests for the court to seek volunteer counsel and to let him proceed as a person unable to afford counsel. The clerk was directed to seek a lawyer for a limited appearance focused on settlement; the representation would not extend to discovery unless the court later expanded its scope.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Francisley Valdevino Da Silva · No. 1:22-cv-10534
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Aug. 19, 2026

Background

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) brought this enforcement action against four defendants in connection with a cryptocurrency pyramid scheme known as Forcount Trader Systems, Inc. The court had previously granted the Government’s request to intervene and stay the case while parallel criminal proceedings against the defendants proceeded. Juan Tacuri later pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and received a 20-year prison sentence. The court stated that the stay of discovery and other deadlines did not prevent settlement discussions.

The SEC reported that it was trying to negotiate a settlement with Tacuri and two other defendants. Because the defendants were incarcerated, the SEC reported difficulty conferring with them. Tacuri renewed his request for appointment of counsel.

Legal standard

In civil cases, the statute governing people who cannot afford litigation costs allows a court to request, rather than require, a lawyer to volunteer. Courts have broad discretion and must seek volunteer counsel sparingly. The court first considers whether the person is indigent, meaning unable to afford counsel, and then considers whether the claim appears substantial and whether factors such as incarceration, language limitations, difficulty investigating facts, complexity, or other circumstances make volunteer counsel more likely to produce a fair resolution.

Court’s analysis

The court reviewed Tacuri’s application and found that he qualified as indigent. It also found that his incarceration and limited English constrained his ability to represent himself in ongoing settlement discussions with the SEC. The court concluded that volunteer counsel would be more likely to lead to a fair determination. Because discovery and other deadlines were stayed, the court limited the representation to settlement.

The requested lawyer would file a notice of limited appearance. Unless the court expanded the representation, the lawyer would not be responsible for discovery if the stay were lifted. The representation would end after settlement was resolved and the lawyer filed a notice of completion.

Disposition

The court granted Tacuri’s applications for the court to request counsel and for permission to proceed under the statute for people unable to afford counsel. The clerk was directed to seek volunteer counsel and to mail Tacuri a copy of the order. The order also stated that finding a volunteer lawyer could take time and was not guaranteed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.