To Submit a Proof of Claim Form in the Stanford Financial Receivership Claims Process, click here.

Recent Developments - This page discusses the following topics:

Receiver files 1st Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the 2nd Interim Distribution Plan - On November 5, 2014, the Receiver filed his 1st Schedule of distribution payments pursuant to the 2nd Interim Distribution Plan with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 1st Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis. To view a copy of the 1st Schedule, please click here.

Receiver files 10th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the 1st Interim Distribution Plan - On September 5, 2014, the Receiver filed his 10th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 10th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 10th Schedule, please click here.

Notice of Ruling in SEC v. SIPC - the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an opinion in SEC v. SIPC. To view a copy of the opinion click here

Court Approves Receiver's 2nd Interim Distribution Plan - On July 2, 2014, the Court approved the Receiver's 2nd Interim Distribution Plan. A copy of the order approving the 2nd Interim Distribution Plan may be found here

Receiver files 9th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the 1st Interim Distribution Plan - On June 3, 2014, the Receiver filed his 9th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 9th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 9th Schedule, please click here.

Joint Comments by the U.S. Receiver, the Examiner and the Official Stanford Investors Committee Concerning the Liquidators' Efforts to Recover Preference Payments - The U.S. Receiver, the Examiner, and the Official Stanford Investors Committee understand that certain SIBL CD investors have received letters or emails from Marcus Wide and Hugh Dickson, the Joint Liquidators appointed by the Antiguan courts to oversee the Antiguan liquidation of SIBL, through which the Joint Liquidators seek to recover from the investors certain amounts (referred to as "preference payments") that the investors had withdrawn or otherwise received from SIBL during the 6 months' prior to the failure of SIBL. We also understand that these letters and/or emails are causing considerable distress and concern among SIBL CD investors. We wish to clarify the following matters:

  1. The U.S. Receiver, the Examiner, and the Official Stanford Investors Committee have no involvement in the Joint Liquidators' effort to recover these "preference payments." The Joint Liquidators are proceeding pursuant to Antiguan law and with the approval of the Antiguan courts. Similarly, the U.S. District Court overseeing the Stanford Receivership has no role in or jurisdiction over the Joint Liquidators' efforts to recover these "preference payments."
  2. The Antiguan Joint Liquidators have posted a set of Frequently Asked Questions concerning their effort to recover "preference payments" on their website. You can review those Frequently Asked Questions at www.sibliquidation.com
  3. We understand that the Antiguan court has established a process for objecting to the Joint Liquidators' effort to recover these "preference payments." In the first instance, any objections must be directed to the Joint Liquidators at Stanford.enquiries@uk.gt.com. Objections must be filed within 120 days after the investor receives the letter or email asserting the Joint Liquidators' claim for these "preference payments."
  4. At present, the Joint Liquidators are not permitted to bring lawsuits in the United States to recover these "preference payments," nor for any other purpose.

Notice of Public Auction of Real Property in Harris County, Texas - RALPH S. JANVEY, in his capacity as the Court-appointed receiver for Stanford International Bank, Ltd.. et al., in Case No. 3:09-CV-0298-N, pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, hereby posts, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2002, this notice of his intention to sell to the highest qualified bidder(s) the following property:

Units 404 and 405 in the Stanford, 505 Bastrop Street, and Vacant Land located in the 500 Block of Dowling Street, Houston, Harris County, Texas (505 Bastrop St - Res Lot A Blk), with a starting minimum bid of $453,200.00.

The Receiver has entered into a stalking horse contract with Texas Bastrop Street LLC, which specifies the starting minimum bid that will be required. Any competing offers must be made pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the Real Property Sales Procedures approved by the Court on January 26, 2010, and should be received in good form no later than five business days prior to the date scheduled for the public auction.

The property will be sold at public auction to be held on March 21, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. at the offices of Baker Botts L.L.P., located at One Shell Plaza, 910 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas 77002. Sales will be for cash or cash equivalents. The Real Property Sales Procedures require bidders to post a deposit in cash or certified funds of no less than five percent of the bidder’s proposed purchase price bid. Sales will be “AS IS” with no representations or warranties of any type, and will close no later than 65 calendar days after the date of entry of a final order of the Court approving the sales.

The Receiver reserves the right to postpone or adjourn the auction, to accept any bid or to reject any and all bids that he deems not to be in the best interests of the Receivership Estate, or to withdraw the property at any time prior to the announcement of the completion of the auction. The Receiver’s acceptance of any bid is expressly conditioned on the successful bidder executing a purchase and sale agreement in form and content satisfactory to the Receiver and complying with the Real Property Sales Procedures.

For additional information, including a legal description for the property, a copy of the Real Property Sales Procedures, or to make a competing offer on the property, please contact Kimberly Schlanger at Baker Botts L.L.P., by email at kimberly.schlanger@bakerbotts.com, or by fax at (713) 229-7799.

Open Letter From Stanford Receiver Dated February 14, 2014 - Click here to view English version of the letter, and click here to view the Spanish version.

Receiver files 8th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On February 4, 2014, the Receiver filed his 8th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 8th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 8th Schedule, please click here.

Third Joint Advisory regarding Pending Motions - On January 15, 2014, the Receiver and the Examiner filed their third advisory to the Court regarding fully briefed motions ripe for ruling. To view the advisory, please click here.

Statement On Behalf of the Receiver Concerning Filing of Petition with the Supreme Court of the United States - On January 22, the court-appointed Stanford Receiver, Ralph S. Janvey, filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States. Janvey is seeking the high court’s aid in unwinding the Ponzi scheme perpetrated by R. Allen Stanford and the Stanford entities — specifically, a holding that the Receiver can assert claims on behalf of the Stanford victims and creditors generally.

Janvey’s petition asks the Court to reverse the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Janvey v. Alguire, which adopted a rule that imposes serious burdens on receivers. The Fifth Circuit’s judgment incorrectly and unnecessarily limits the ability of the Receiver to fulfil his duties by holding that the Receiver is only empowered to bring claims on behalf of the Stanford Entities themselves. The Fifth Circuit’s decision is part of a pattern of conflicting decisions on this issue from appellate courts across the country. Indeed, the Fifth Circuit issued three decisions in this very case, the last of which reversed its prior holding that the Receiver could bring claims on behalf of victims and creditors generally.

Janvey’s petition follows a similar petition filed by Irving Picard, the court-appointed trustee charged with unwinding the Madoff Ponzi scheme. Although receivers and bankruptcy trustees differ in some ways, they share a common duty based on an important legal principle — receivers and trustees have standing to pursue claims that will benefit generally the victims and creditors whose interests they represent. These two petitions provide an opportunity for the Court to eliminate confusion in the courts of appeals, re-affirm this important legal principle, and remove a serious obstacle hindering the work of the court appointed officers who are responsible for dismantling the two largest Ponzi schemes in history. Please click here to view the Petition.

Receiver's 7th Interim Report Regarding Status of Receivership, Asset Collection and Ongoing Activities - On January 15, 2014, the Receiver filed a report with the Court that discusses the status of the Receivership, the Receivership's asset collection efforts and ongoing activities. To view the report, click here.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Order Requiring Trustmark National Bank to Turn Over Stanford Receivership Funds to Receiver. On January 8, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed an order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas that required Trustmark National Bank to turn over approximately $2.1 million in Stanford Receivership funds to the Receiver. The District Court had also imposed contempt sanctions against Trustmark based on Trustmark’s failure to timely abide by the District Court’s turnover order. Trustmark appealed both the turnover order and the contempt order. In a per curiam opinion, the Court of Appeals rejected all of Trustmark’s challenges and affirmed the District Court’s orders. Click here to view the Opinion.

Receiver's Sixth Interim Report Regarding Status of Receivership, Asset Collection and Ongoing Activities - On August 26, 2013, the Receiver filed a report with the Court that discusses the status of the Receivership, the Receivership's asset collection efforts and ongoing activities. To view the report, click here.

Receiver files 7th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On December 4, 2013, the Receiver filed his 7th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 7th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 7th Schedule, please click here.

Receiver files 6th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On November 4, 2013, the Receiver filed his 6th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 6th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 6th Schedule, please click here.

Receiver files 5th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On October 25, 2013, the Receiver filed his 5th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 5th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 5th Schedule, please click here.

Receiver files 4th Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On October 17, 2013, the Receiver filed his 4th Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 4th Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 4th Schedule, please click here.

Receiver files 3rd Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On October 4, 2013, the Receiver filed his 3rd Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 3rd Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 3rd Schedule, please click here.

Receivership Settlement Agreement Approved in Canada - The Ontario Superior Court of Justice and the Quebec Superior Court have both approved a settlement agreement by and among the Receiver, the Interim Receiver appointed for Stanford International Bank in Quebec, the Ontario attorney general, and others. The settlement agreement addresses the disposition of Stanford assets in Canada that had been frozen by the Ontario attorney general. The approval of both the Quebec and Ontario courts was required because both courts had asserted jurisdiction over the Stanford assets in Canada. Pursuant to the Canadian settlement, approximately $18 million will be turned over to the United States Department of Justice by the Ontario attorney general. Pursuant to the separate Settlement Agreement and Cross-Border Protocol, entered into by and among the Receiver, the United States Department of Justice, and others, the United States Department of Justice will then turn the funds over to the Receiver for distribution to the victims of the Stanford fraud. Additional amounts may be returned to the United States for distribution by the Receiver following further proceedings in Ontario. Please click here to view copies of the Canadian orders.

Receiver files 2nd Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On September 16, 2013, the Receiver filed his 2nd Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 2nd Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 2nd Schedule, please click here.

Receiver files 1st Schedule of Payments to be Made Pursuant to the Interim Distribution Plan - On August 20, 2013, the Receiver filed his 1st Schedule of distribution payments with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. The 1st Schedule will be followed by others, each of which will be submitted by the Receiver on a rolling basis as additional responses to Certification Notices are received and processed. To view a copy of the 1st Schedule, please click here.

The Receiver and Examiner file Joint Advisory to the Court Regarding Pending Motions - In the filing, the Receiver and Examiner advise the Court of the motions that are pending in cases filed by the Receiver or the Official Stanford Investors and that are fully briefed and awaiting ruling by the Court. Click here to view a copy of the Advisory.

Court Approves Receiver’s Interim Distribution Plan - On May 30, 2013, the Court approved the Receiver’s interim distribution plan. A copy of the order approving the interim distribution plan may be found here.

The Court’s order states that the distribution process will begin within 90 days of the date of the order. That process, which includes sending out collateral source certification requests to claimants, will actually begin the week of June 3, 2013. Specifically, the Receiver expects to send out the requests for certification concerning collateral source recovery within 10 business days after the order was entered to all claimants who have been issued notices of determination. The requests are being sent in both English and Spanish, are pre-populated with claimant names and claim numbers, and require the signatures of the claimants. The certification forms are being sent by e-mail (if e-mail addresses were provided) to all claimants within a claim group or, if no e-mail address was provided, are being sent via physical mail. Claimants will have 60 days to return the certifications to the Receiver. For those claimants who have not yet received notices of determination, their certification requests will be sent after their notices of determination are issued.

Please note that payments will not be made immediately upon receipt of each signed certification. Once the Receiver has obtained the requisite certifications for a sufficient number of claim groups, he will file with the Court his schedule of proposed payments to those groups at least 10 days before the payments are made. The schedules will include claim ID numbers and the amounts of payments but will not include claimant names or other identifying information. Schedules will be filed with the Court on a rolling basis. After each particular schedule has been on file for at least 10 days, the Receiver will begin sending payments to applicable claim groups. As additional certifications are received, this process will continue until all payments required under the order approving the interim distribution plan are complete.

Based on the above procedures, the Receiver expects to begin making payments in approximately 90 days. Please understand that not everyone will receive payments within 90 days, and payments to additional groups will be made on a rolling basis through the process described above.

Status of Political Contribution Returns - To view information on political campaign contributions that have been returned to the Receivership Estate, click here.

Notice of Public Auctions of Personal Property in Dallas County, Texas - RALPH S. JANVEY, in his capacity as the Court-appointed receiver for Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL), et al., in Case No. 3:09-CV-0298-N, pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, hereby posts, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2001, 2002 and 2004, this notice of his intention to sell to the highest qualified bidder(s) certain personal property located at 1518 Slocum St., Dallas, Dallas County, TX 75207, including a Dale Chihuly chandelier and Terrance Main sculpture (collectively, the “Personal Property”).

All interested and qualified purchasers are invited to attend and bid at the auctions. The Personal Property is owned by the Receiver in his capacity as Receiver for R. Allen Stanford and affiliated companies. The Stanford Property will be sold without recourse to R. Allen Stanford, any affiliated entity or the Stanford Financial Group Receivership. Neither the Receiver nor any of his representatives makes any representation or warranty, express or implied (including, without limitation, title) with respect to any item of the Stanford Property.

The Personal Property will be sold at public auction to be held on Wednesday, May 22, 2013 at 10:00 AM at 1518 Slocum St. Dallas, Dallas County, TX 75207. Any successful bid shall be subject to a 25% buyer’s premium on the first $50,000, 20% of any amount between $50,000 and $1,000,000 and 12% of any amount over $1,000,000 and shall be paid in cash, check, or certified funds in accordance with the auctioneers terms and conditions of auction.

The Receiver reserves the right to postpone or adjourn any of the auctions, to accept any bid or to reject any and all bids that he deems not to be in the best interests of the Receivership Estate, or to withdraw any of the personal property at any time prior to the announcement of the completion of any of the auctions in accordance with the Receiver’s agreement with the auctioneer.

For additional information, including descriptions of the Personal Property, please contact Heritage Auctions at (800) 872-6467.

Inquiries Concerning Prior Investigation by SEC OIGThe Receiver has been made aware of recent inquiries concerning a prior investigation by the Office of Inspector General of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission ("OIG"). The Receiver is aware that the OIG opened an investigation in 2011 concerning the SEC's retention and oversight of the Receiver.

The Receiver received an inquiry in early 2012 from the OIG, to which he responded by letter dated March 9, 2012. A copy of the Receiver's response to the OIG inquiry can be found at the following link.

The Receiver also received an inquiry, covering topics similar to those addressed in the OIG's inquiry, from Senator David Vitter and Representative Bill Cassidy, on May 24, 2012. The Receiver responded to the inquiry from Senator Vitter and Representative Cassidy by letter dated June 22, 2012, and a copy of the response can be found at the following link.

After providing the above responses, the Receiver received no further inquiries from the OIG, Senator Vitter or Representative Cassidy.

The Receiver understands that the OIG investigation concerning the SEC's retention and oversight of the Receiver was closed in late 2012 and that no final report was issued or published. See November 30, 2012 memo from the Interim Inspector General to the SEC, which can be found at the following link.

Receiver's Fifth Interim Report Regarding Status of Receivership, Asset Collection and Ongoing Activities - On February 7, 2013, the Receiver filed a report with the Court that discusses the status of the Receivership, the Receivership's asset collection efforts and ongoing activities. To view the report, click here.

US District Court approves Settlement Agreement and Cross-Border Protocol - Click here to download the Order.

Antigua and Barbuda High Court of Justice approves Settlement Agreement and Cross-Border Protocol - Click here to download the Order.

Court Sets Hearing on Receiver's Motions to Approve Distribution and Settlement Concerning Foreign Assets - The Court will hold a hearing on the Receiver's motion for approval of interim distribution plan [1766] and the SEC, Receiver, Examiner, and Official Stanford Investors Committee's joint motion to approve settlement agreement and cross-border protocol (the "Joint Motion") [Doc. 1793 in SEC v. Stanford, 09-CV-298, Doc. 189 in In re: Stanford International Bank, 09-CV-721] on Thursday, April 11, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1505. The time for parties to these actions to respond to the Receiver's motion for approval of interim distribution plan has lapsed, see N.D. TEX. R. CIV. P. 7.1(e), and the Court will not entertain any further responses or objections from those parties. Parties who wish to file a response to the Joint Motion must do so no later than March 28, 2013 at 5:00. Nonparties, including but not limited to investors or other potential claimants, may file written comments or objections to either motion, also no later than March 28, 2013 at 5:00 p.m. The Receiver may file a reply to those responses, comments, or objections no later than April 5, 2013 at 5:00 PM. During the hearing, the Court will not entertain comments, objections, or argument from parties or nonparties that failed to file written responses, comments, or objections.

Receiver, SEC, Examiner, and Official Stanford Investors Committee file Joint Motion to Approve Settlement Agreement and Cross-Border Protocol - Click here to view a copy of the Motion, which includes a copy of the Settlement Agreement and Cross-Border Protocol. The deadline to file responses to the Motion is March 28, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.

Stanford International Bank Joint Liquidators, U.S. Stanford Receiver, Examiner, Official Stanford Investors Committee, DOJ, and SEC Sign Settlement Agreement and Cross-Border Protocol - DALLAS, TX, March 12, 2013 - The Joint Liquidators (JLs) Marcus Wide and Hugh Dickson of the Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIB) and the U.S. Receiver for Stanford Financial Group and all related entities (Receiver), announced today that they have entered into a Settlement Agreement and Cross-Border Protocol (Settlement Agreement) with one another, the U.S. Examiner, John Little, the Official Stanford Investors Committee (OSIC), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The Advisory Creditors Committee of the Liquidation of SIB has also voted to give its approval to the Settlement Agreement.

Among many other benefits, the Settlement Agreement resolves litigation over approximately $300 million in assets frozen in Canada, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, and creates a unified plan among the JLs, the Receiver, and the DOJ to expedite the handling and distribution of those assets to creditor-victims.

The Settlement Agreement will only become effective after it has been approved by courts in the US, Antigua, and the U.K. When the Agreement is presented to the US court and the Antiguan court for approval, victims will have the opportunity to appear and express their views concerning the Settlement Agreement. After all three courts have approved the Settlement Agreement, it will become effective and pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement the parties will pursue the release of funds via appropriate legal processes in the respective countries, including Canada and Switzerland.

The Settlement Agreement has several benefits, including that it:

  • creates a plan for the distribution of almost 90% of the frozen assets from the U.K., Canada, and Switzerland pursuant to which distributions will be made as soon as the necessary approvals are obtained from the pertinent authorities in those countries;
  • allocates $36 million of the funds in the U.K. to the JLs’ estate in order to pursue additional funds for the estate, to be released over time under the supervision of the U.K. Central Criminal Court, which the JLs expect to significantly enhance amounts available for distribution because those funds will be used to further additional asset recovery efforts. The remaining $44 million of the funds in the U.K. will be distributed to creditor-victims by the JLs;
  • allocates in Canada all $23 million to the DOJ to be transferred to the Receiver to be distributed to creditor-victims;
  • allocates in Switzerland $132.5 million to be forfeited to the DOJ and transferred to the Receiver to be distributed to creditor-victims and $60.5 million to be transferred to the JLs for distribution to victims;
  • provides that distribution of the frozen funds shall be made to creditor-victims of SIB and not to other claimants such as the Internal Revenue Service or the Antiguan government;
  • provides a framework for the sharing of information among the JLs, the Receiver, and OSIC to achieve efficiencies, minimize burdens, and maximize recoveries in Stanford-related litigation;
  • facilitates cooperation and coordination of efforts with respect to litigation and recovery and monetization of Stanford assets;
  • provides for coordination of claims and distribution processes between the JLs and the Receiver; and
  • terminates the substantial expense of competing legal claims to, and proceedings relating to, the frozen assets in Canada, the U.K., Switzerland, and the US.

The Settlement Agreement is a product of the parties’ common goal of optimizing and enlarging the overall recovery for creditor-victims as quickly and cost-effectively as possible. The parties to the Agreement all believe that the Agreement is in the best interests of the victims of the Stanford fraud.

Further information, including a copy of the Agreement, will be posted on the U.S. Receiver’s website at http://stanfordfinancialreceivership.com, on the JLs official website at http://www.sibliquidation.com, and on the Examiner’s website http://www.lpf-law.com/. Persons who believe they were victims of this fraud scheme should visit those sites for additional information.

Settlement Agreement and Cross-Border Protocol Q and A

When will money be distributed?

The date when distributions will be made is presently unknown. Although the Receiver, the Joint Liquidators, and the Department of Justice have reached agreement regarding the disposition of the international Stanford assets, the assets remain in control of authorities in the U.K., Switzerland, and Canada. The parties will work together to encourage these authorities to release the assets quickly upon approval of the agreement so that money may be distributed to creditor-victims as soon as possible.

What was the cause for the delay in reaching a final agreement after the agreement in principle was announced?

The settlement agreement is a six-party agreement that deals with assets and related litigation in five different jurisdictions. As a result, the drafting of the agreement was a lengthy process, requiring consultation with attorneys and authorities in numerous jurisdictions. Once the agreement was drafted, all parties to the agreement carefully evaluated the agreement, considering all possible implications of finally approving its terms. Because of the importance of the issues covered by the settlement agreement, the final deliberative phase of the process was necessarily lengthy. The length of time needed to complete the settlement agreement is ultimately a reflection of the degree of care all parties exercised in preparing and finalizing the agreement.

Why is $36 million being reserved for working capital?

The settlement agreement allocates $18 million to the Antiguan liquidation estate primarily to fund litigation that the parties believe will have a substantially positive return for the Antiguan liquidation estate. An additional $18 million may also be allocated for working capital, including litigation funding, if necessary. This working capital cannot be used to fund any litigation adverse to any other party to the definitive agreement. Further, every effort will be made to minimize the amount actually used for working capital, and any funds not actually used for working capital will be released for distribution to creditor-victims.

What is the status of the $20 million that was previously loaned to the Antiguan liquidation estate from the U.K. Central Criminal Court?

The $20 million, which came from Stanford assets in the U.K., was advanced to the Antiguan liquidation estate during the pendency of the dispute over control of those assets. The funds have been spent to cover expenses of the Antiguan liquidation estate, which was the purpose for which they were advanced by the Central Criminal Court. Because the Settlement Agreement places control of the U.K. assets with the Antiguan Joint Liquidators, the Settlement Agreement extinguishes the obligation to repay the loan.

Who will receive money from the distribution?

The international assets covered by the settlement agreement will be released only to creditor-victims of the Stanford fraud scheme. No other claimant will receive a distribution from the pool of international assets. Therefore, claimants such as the United States Internal Revenue Service and the Government of Antigua and Barbuda will be excluded from the distribution of the international Stanford assets.

What do claimants need to do to become eligible for a distribution by the Receiver from the international assets covered by the settlement agreement?

The Receiver will distribute funds from the international assets to eligible claimants who submitted claims to the Receiver on or before September 1, 2012, which was the deadline set by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas for submitting claims to the Receiver. Claimants do not need to take any further action at this time to become eligible for a distribution of funds from the international assets.

Why aren't the Joint Liquidators and the Receiver making a single, joint distribution?

The Receiver and the Joint Liquidators are each charged by their appointing courts with making a distribution of assets from their respective estates. The laws applicable to their respective distributions are similar but not identical. Therefore, it is impractical to have a single, joint distribution. However, the Joint Liquidators and the Receiver have agreed to coordinate their efforts to the maximum extent possible to minimize duplication.

Will this agreement end all litigation between the Receiver and the Joint Liquidators?

The agreement will resolve all current disputes between and among the Receiver, the Joint Liquidators, and the Department of Justice concerning the international Stanford assets. It is anticipated that further court proceedings may be required before all international assets are released for distribution. However, the Receiver, the Joint Liquidators, and the Department of Justice have agreed to work in concert in any such proceedings to ensure that assets are released for distribution as quickly and expeditiously as possible.

What has to happen before the settlement agreement is fully and finally approved?

The settlement agreement will be presented to the US federal court in Dallas, the court in Antigua and Barbuda, and to the Central Criminal Court in London. Once all of those courts have approved the settlement agreement, the agreement will become effective.

Will creditors be permitted to state their views concerning the settlement agreement prior to review of the agreement by the courts?

Yes. The Receiver, the Joint Liquidators, the Examiner, and the Official Stanford Investors Committee each invite Stanford creditors to contact them and express their views, whether favorable or unfavorable, concerning the settlement agreement. Creditors are also encouraged to file any objections to the settlement agreement with the courts in the United States and Antigua and to attend the hearings regarding approval of the settlement agreement. The Receiver, the Joint Liquidators, and the Examiner will post notice on their respective websites regarding the date and locations of those hearings, as well as the deadlines for filing objections to settlement approval. Creditors considering filing an objection or appearing in court should consult with their own legal counsel.

How will the Receiver, the Joint Liquidators, and the Official Stanford Investors Committee handle asset recovery litigation in the future?

In general, the Receiver, the Official Stanford Investors Committee, and the Joint Liquidators will continue to handle litigation in the jurisdictions where they have already been recognized. The Receiver, the Official Stanford Investors Committee, and the Joint Liquidators will share information and coordinate their efforts when possible in an effort to maximize recoveries for victims of the Stanford fraud.


The District Court Rules in Favor of the Receiver in His Claim to Recover Net Winnings Paid to Stanford "Net Winner" Investors - On January 23, 2013, the District Court entered a summary judgment order in favor of the Receiver finding that the Receiver is entitled to recover from Stanford investors any funds they were paid in excess of the principal they deposited in the Stanford fraud scheme. The Court ruled that the net winner investors' contracts with Stanford are void and unenforceable and that the investors did not provide value for amounts they received from Stanford in excess of the amounts they deposited. As a result, the Court held that that allowing the net winner investors "to keep their fraudulent above-market returns in addition to their principal would simply further victimize the true Stanford victims, whose money paid the fraudulent interest." Although the District Court's order is not a final judgment, the District Court certified the order for appeal, which means that it will likely be appealed in the near future to the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

The Receiver is pleased with the Court's ruling today that those investors who profited from the Stanford ponzi scheme do not have the right to retain those profits. This decision represents an important milestone in the very long and difficult process of unwinding the massive Stanford ponzi scheme. In his ruling, Judge Godbey agreed with the Receiver's position that the fictitious interest payments that Stanford made to investors on their Stanford International Bank certificates of deposit simply represented money taken from one set of investors and paid to another; it was just part of Stanford's efforts that kept the ponzi scheme going for well over a decade.

Based on his investigation, the Receiver identified over $220 million in net winnings or fictitious interest that was paid to over 800 investors. The Receiver intends to use this ruling to pursue recovery of these funds for the benefit of the thousands of investors who sustained significant losses on their Stanford CDs. Once recovered, these funds can be distributed to the victims of the Stanford fraud, which would be in addition to the $55 million that the Receiver has already proposed for distribution. Click here to view the Order.

The Receiver is continuing to pursue recovery through litigation of other funds that can be distributed to victims, and he continues to work cooperatively with the U.S. Department of Justice and the Antiguan-appointed Liquidators to reach a final agreement to make available for distribution approximately $300 million in funds and assets currently frozen in foreign countries.

The Receiver Files Motion for Approval of Interim Distribution Plan - The Receiver filed a motion with the US District Court on Friday, January 11, 2013 seeking authorization to make an interim distribution to Stanford CD investors. The filing of the motion is a significant milestone in the Stanford Receivership. Once the motion is granted, the Receiver will be authorized to distribute approximately $55 million to Stanford CD investors to compensate them on a pro rata basis for their respective net losses. The net loss for each investor is calculated as the difference between the amount the investor deposited with Stanford and the amount the investor withdrew, without respect to any fictitious interest that may have been credited to the investor by Stanford. The Receiver is continuing his work to marshal the assets of the Receivership estate, and he anticipates making additional distributions in the future, which may be supplemented by Stanford assets overseas if the Receiver is able to conclude an agreement with the Antiguan Joint Liquidators and the Department of Justice concerning those assets. Click here to view the Motion.

Joint Press Release and Statement of the U.S. Receiver (Ralph Janvey), the Joint Liquidators (Marcus Wide and Hugh Dickson), and the U.S. Examiner (John Little)After extensive negotiations, and with the input of United States DOJ and SEC representatives, the U.S. Receiver (Ralph Janvey), the Joint Liquidators (Marcus Wide and Hugh Dickson), and the U.S. Examiner (John Little) have reached an agreement, in principle, that, if finalized and approved by the relevant authorities, would result in (a) coordination between the U.S. Receiver and the Joint Liquidators concerning their respective claim processes, (b) increased sharing of information, (c) cooperation with respect to the asset recovery and some of the other litigation efforts, (d) a resolution of pending disputes concerning funds now frozen in the United Kingdom, Canada and Switzerland, and (e) a release of funds for distribution to Stanford’s investor-victims.

We are working on finalizing a definitive settlement agreement, which we hope to be able to present in the near future for public comment and court approval. To facilitate their discussions, all of the participants have agreed to keep these negotiations confidential until definitive agreement is reached or the parties conclude that no agreement will be possible. The U.S. Receiver, the Joint Liquidators and the U.S. Examiner have agreed to release this statement so that Stanford victims know that the various participants are continuing to work to reach an agreement that will achieve the goals set forth above. We continue to have your interests at the forefront and we understand the very difficult circumstances you face as victims.

Antiguan Joint Liquidators File Motion to Extend Briefing Deadlines in Fifth Circuit Based on Successful Negotiation of Confidential Settlement Term Sheet - Click here for the Motion.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Judgment Ordering National Political Committees to Repay $1.6 Million in Stanford Contributions- On October 23, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a summary and final judgment in favor of the Receiver that ordered five Democratic and Republican national political committees to repay more than $1.6 million in Stanford political contributions. The judgment in the case also requires the defendants to pay more than $500,000 in attorneys' fees, costs, and interest thereby resulting in a total award that may exceed $2.2 million. In a unanimous opinion, the Court affirmed the long-standing principle that federal equity receivers are permitted to recover fraudulent transfers made by the individuals and entities over whom they are appointed. Click here to view the Opinion.

Notice of Public Auctions of Miscellaneous Assets - The Receiver hereby posts this notice of his intention to sell to the highest qualified bidder(s) certain personal property including (i) certain personal property located at 4200 Blaffer St., Houston, Harris County, TX 77026, including household items, furniture, bookcases, light fixtures, household appliances and equipment, bathroom fixtures and accessories, golf carts, 18 foot Nautica rigid inflatable boat, with a 90 horse power Yamaha motor and trailer, kitchenware, clocks, a piano, liquor, mirrors, artwork, men’s and women’s clothing, audio visual equipment, commemorative items, memorabilia, linens, blankets, lamps, books, and other amenities and decorations, gym equipment, and other sundry items of personalty (collectively, the “Personal Property”); (ii) five automobiles, including a 2001 Ford F-150, a 2000 Ford Expedition XLT, a 2003 Honda Pilot and two 2007 Jeep Commanders (the “Personal Automobiles”); (iii) three automobiles, including a 2006 Nissan Frontier, a 2005 Chevrolet Trailblazer and a 2003 Saturn Vue (the “Company Automobiles”); and (iv) two automobiles, including a 1975 Chevy Corvette Stingray and a 1937 Chevrolet sedan (the “Davis” Automobiles).

The Personal Property will be sold at public auction to be held on Saturday, October 6, 2012 at 10:00 AM at 4200 Blaffer St. Houston, Harris County, TX 77026. Any successful bid shall be subject to a 10% buyer’s premium and shall be paid in cash, check, major credit cards, or certified funds. The Personal Automobiles, the Company Automobiles and the Davis Automobiles will be sold at public auction to be held on Tuesday, October 9, 2012 at 9:00 am at 14450 West Road, Houston, Harris County, TX 77041. Any successful bid shall be subject to a 2% buyer’s premium and shall be paid in cash or certified funds.

For additional information, including descriptions of the Personal Property, please contact Seth Worstell Auction Company at (713) 670-7776 or (713) 670-7740. For additional information, including descriptions of the Personal Automobiles, the Company Automobiles and the Davis Automobiles, please contact Jay Rogers at (281) 953-8858. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Receiver's Statement Regarding IRS Notice of Claim - On August 31, 2012, the Receiver made the following statement regarding the Internal Revenue Service's "notice of claim" filed with the Court on August 30, 2012:
The Internal Revenue Service filed a "notice of claim" yesterday with the US District Court advising the Court that it is IRS's view that Allen Stanford is indebted to the United States for approximately $432 million in personal tax liability. The IRS intervened in the SEC's lawsuit against Allen Stanford three years ago and asserted the existence of a claim against Allen and Susan Stanford, which at that time was for approximately $226 million in personal tax liability. The U.S. District Court permitted the intervention and retained the authority to adjudicate all aspects of the IRS claim.

It has been the Receiver's consistent position that the IRS claim for Mr. Stanford's personal tax liability cannot take priority over the claims of investors who were victimized by the Stanford Ponzi scheme. Any assets of the Receivership acquired by Mr. Stanford were acquired through fraud and as a result of fraudulent transfers. Accordingly, it is the Receiver's position that there are no assets available to satisfy the IRS's tax claim. Indeed, as Judge Godbey ruled in refusing to allow Mr. Stanford to obtain receivership assets to fund his criminal defense, Mr. Stanford has no assets that are untainted by fraud. The Receiver understands, based on his discussions with Department of Justice officials, that the IRS is of the same view and that the purpose of the IRS claim is simply to ensure that, in the unlikely event that there is any money left after Stanford victims' claims are fully satisfied, such money might be used to satisfy a claim that the IRS may establish against Mr. Stanford, rather than being returned to Mr. Stanford himself. Consistent with this understanding, the Receiver is aware that the IRS has communicated in writing to the US DOJ that the IRS does not intend to pursue a claim against any of the funds that the DOJ, with the assistance of the Receiver, is working to return to the United States from Switzerland, Canada, and the UK.

If the IRS were to take a contrary position and were to attempt to claim priority over victims with respect to funds marshaled by the Receiver or funds the Receiver receives from the DOJ for distribution, the Receiver would contest vigorously any such claim of priority by the IRS. The Receiver believes that under both applicable state and federal law, monies that SIBL received from investors through fraud, which were later fraudulently transferred to Mr. Stanford personally, cannot be used to satisfy any personal federal tax obligation of Mr. Stanford. Particularly in light of Mr. Stanford's criminal conviction and a jury finding that Mr. Stanford's assets were procured by fraud, the Receiver does not believe the IRS has any factual or legal basis to assert a claim of priority over defrauded Stanford investors.

Receiver's Interim Report Regarding Claims Process - On August 29, 2012, the Receiver filed a report with the Court that discusses the status of the Receivership's claim process. To view the report, click here.

Court Issues Order Directing the Antiguan Liquidators to Cooperate with the US Receiver and Denies the Antiguan Liquidators' Request to have the Antiguan Proceeding Recognized as the Foreign Main Proceeding for Stanford International Bank Ltd. - On July 30, 2012, the Court issued an order in response to the Joint Liquidators’ petition for recognition, holding that the Stanford International Bank, Ltd. liquidation proceeding in the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court is not a foreign main proceeding under Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code. (click here to view a copy of the order).

Notice of Ruling in SEC v. SIPC - On July 3, 2012, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued a memorandum of opinion and order in SEC v. SIPC. To view a copy of the opinion and the order, click here.

Receiver's Fourth Interim Report Regarding Status of Receivership, Asset Collection and Ongoing Activities - On June 22, 2012, the Receiver filed a report with the Court that discusses the status of the Receivership, the Receivership's asset collection efforts and ongoing activities. To view the report, click here.

Receiver's First Monthly Report Regarding Fees and Expenses Incurred as a Result of the Claims Process - On June 8, 2012, the Receiver filed a report with the Court reflecting the fees and expenses incurred by the Receiver as a result of the claims process. To view a copy of this report, click here.

Second Joint Report Regarding Pending Litigation - On June 1, 2012, the Receiver, the Examiner and the Investors Committee filed a comprehensive, joint report addressing the status (as of March 31, 2012) of all pending litigation brought by the Receiver, the Committee, and by Committee members as class counsel. The report details the status of the 63 different lawsuits that have been brought by the Receiver and/or the Committee for the benefit of the Receivership Estate, as well as the 15 different class actions in which members of the Committee are serving as class counsel. To view a copy of the Joint Report, click here.

Notice of Private Equity Auction - The Receiver has entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of Stanford Venture Capital Holdings, Inc.'s (SVCH) (i) 4,535,890 shares of KineMed, Inc. (KineMed) common stock; (ii) warrants to purchase up to 303,030 shares of KineMed common stock, and (iii) warrants to purchase up to 50,000 shares of KineMed common stock. Pursuant to the Private Equity Sales Procedures adopted by the Receiver, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sales on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Change of Plea in United States v. Laura Pendergest-Holt - On June 18, 2012, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas issued a Notice of Setting indicating that on June 21, 2012, at 11:00 a.m., the defendant Laura Pendergest-Holt is expected to plead guilty to resolve the pending charges against her in the above-referenced case. At that time, Holt will enter into a plea agreement with the government pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Under that rule, the government agrees that a specific sentence or sentencing range is the appropriate disposition of the case, or that a particular provision of the Sentencing Guidelines, or policy statement, or sentencing factor does or does not apply. Such a recommendation or request binds only the court once the court accepts the plea agreement at sentencing. To resolve the pending charges against her, the defendant Laura Pendergest-Holt is expected to plead guilty to Count Twenty of the Indictment, charging Obstruction of Justice, and the government has agreed that a sentence of 36 months of imprisonment, followed by a three-year term of supervised release, is the appropriate disposition of the case. She will also be subject to a fine, to be determined by the Court.

In light of this recent development, and in order for us to learn if you have any views in regard to any such plea, please submit your views to the prosecutors handling this investigation, by providing comments to Pam Washington at 1-888-549-3945 or via email at victimassistance.fraud@usdoj.gov, no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on June 20, 2012. Also, in accordance with the Order Authorizing Compliance with the Justice for All Act issued in this case on June 16, 2010, any victim wishing to appear and to be heard by the Court at the plea hearing must notify Pam Washington at victimassistance.fraud@usdoj.gov by the same June 20 deadline. However, as the defendant Laura Pendergest-Holt is pleading guilty under Rule 11 (c)(1)(C), and her plea agreement will not be accepted until the time of sentencing, the government will continue to accept comments concerning the plea after the June 20 deadline and up until 30 days before sentencing. The Court will later rule on whether, and the manner in which, victims may be heard at the sentencing proceeding. Lastly, because this plea agreement was reached recently, and because the precise language of the plea agreement is still being finalized, the executed plea agreement will be filed publicly following the June 21, 2012 hearing.

Please visit the Department of Justice's website at http://www.justice.gov/criminal/vns/caseup/holt-lopez-kuhrt.html to obtain details about the upcoming June 21, 2012 change of plea hearing in United States v. Laura Pendgergest-Holt which will be held at 11 a.m. in Courtroom 8A before Judge David Hittner.

Notice of Sentencing in United States v. Robert Allen Stanford - On June 14, 2012, Robert Allen Stanford, the former Chairman of Stanford International Bank (SIB), was sentenced to 110 years in prison for orchestrating a 20 year investment fraud scheme in which he misappropriated $7 billion from SIB to finance his personal businesses and lifestyle. Stanford was convicted on March 6, 2012, following a six week trial and approximately three days of deliberation on 13 of 14 counts in the indictment. Stanford was convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud, four counts of wire fraud, five counts of mail fraud, one count of conspiracy to obstruct a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation, one count of obstruction of an SEC investigation and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering. The jury also found that 29 financial accounts located abroad and worth approximately $330 million were proceeds of Stanford’s fraud and should be forfeited.

After considering all the evidence, including more than 350 victim impact letters that were sent to the court, U.S. District Judge Hittner sentenced Stanford to 20 years for conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud, 20 years on each of the four counts of wire fraud as well as five years for conspiring to obstruct a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation and five years for obstruction of an SEC investigation. Those sentences will all run consecutively. He also received 20 years for each of the five counts of mail fraud and 20 years for conspiracy to commit money laundering which will run concurrent to the other sentences imposed for a total sentence of 110 years.

As part of Stanford’s sentence, the court also imposed a personal money judgment of $5.9 billion, which is an ongoing obligation for Stanford to pay back the criminal proceeds. The court found that it would be impracticable to issue a restitution order at this time. However, all forfeited funds recovered by the United States will be returned to the fraud victims and credited against Stanford’s money judgment.

Please visit the Department of Justice's website at http://www.justice.gov/criminal/vns/caseup/stanfordr.html to obtain additional details about the June 14, 2012 hearing in United States v. Robert Allen Stanford at which he was sentenced.

Sentencing Hearing Scheduled in Stanford Criminal Case - On March 6, 2012, Robert Allen Stanford, the former Board of Directors Chairman of Stanford International Bank (SIB), was found guilty of orchestrating a 20-year investment fraud scheme in which he misappropriated $7 billion to finance his personal businesses and lifestyle. Following a six-week trial, the jury found Stanford guilty on 13 of 14 counts in the indictment. Stanford was convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud, four counts of wire fraud, five counts of mail fraud, one count of conspiracy to obstruct a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation, one count of obstruction of an SEC investigation and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering. Stanford was acquitted on one count of wire fraud (Count 2: 18 U.S.C. § 1343).

Mr. Stanford is scheduled to be sentenced on June 14, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 8A, 8th Floor, before U.S. District Court Judge David Hittner, United States Courthouse, 515 Rusk Avenue, Houston, Texas. Mr. Stanford faces a maximum prison sentence of 20 years for each of the following counts: conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud, wire and mail fraud, and conspiracy to commit money laundering, and five years for each of the following counts: conspiracy to obstruct an SEC investigation and obstruction of an SEC investigation.

** If you have suffered losses as a result of the crimes committed by Mr. Stanford, you have the right to submit a Victim Impact Statement or letter in aid of sentencing to explain how the crimes affected you. Victim impact includes physical, emotional and/or financial loss. Victims who wish to submit a Victim Impact Statement and be heard in writing should do so by completing a Victim Impact Form (or a letter addressed to Judge David Hittner) and mailing it to Judge David Hittner at: Chambers, United States District Court, 515 Rusk Street, Room 8509, Houston TX 77002-2600. To be considered by the Court, the correspondence must be received by Judge Hittner’s Chambers no later than June 1, 2012. The Court will provide the Government and defense attorneys with copies of the Victim Impact Forms and victim letters.

Victims who wish to speak in person at the sentencing should contact Ellen Alexander with the United States Clerk's Office for the Southern District of Texas at (713) 250-5511 by June 1, 2012. Due to the number of victims in this case, the Court cannot guarantee that every victim who wishes to speak will be provided an opportunity to do so. The Court will decide which organizations will be permitted to speak in coordination with the Probation Office and notify them by June 7, 2012. To view a copy of the Court's Order regarding victims' statements, click here.

Notice of Bar Date and Procedures for Submitting Proofs of Claims - On May 4, 2012, the Court issued an order granting the Receiver’s Amended Motion for Entry of an Order Establishing a Bar Date for Claims. The Receiver has begun accepting Proofs of Claims from those persons and entities that believe they possess a potential or claimed right to payment, or a potential claim of any nature, against Stanford International Bank, Ltd., Stanford Group Company, Stanford Capital Management, LLC, Robert Allen Stanford, James M. Davis, Laura Pendergest-Holt, Stanford Financial Group and the Stanford Financial Group Bldg Inc. and all the entities they own or control. To view a copy of the Notice of Bar Date and Procedures for Submitting Proofs of Claim being sent to potential claimants, click here.

Court Issues Order Granting Receiver's Motion to Establish Bar Date for Claims and Procedures for Submitting Proofs of Claim - On May 4, 2012, the Court issued an order granting the Receiver’s Amended Motion for Entry of an Order Establishing a Bar Date for Claims. To view a copy of the Court's order, click here. The Court's order established September 1, 2012, at 11:59 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) as the deadline for certain claimants to submit a completed and signed Proof of Claim Form under penalty of perjury, together with supporting documentation (a "Proof of Claim Form"), against the Defendants in the Stanford Receivership case. To view a copy of the Receiver's press release regarding the claims process, click here. For more information regarding the claims process or to submit a Proof of Claim Form, click here.

Notice of Public Auctions of Miscellaneous Assets - The Receiver hereby posts this notice of his intention to sell to the highest qualified bidder(s) certain personal property including (i) a Cartier watch and household items, including gym equipment; furniture, lamps, and other amenities and decorations; musical instruments, including a guitar and a piano; a telescope; and other sundry items of personalty (collectively, the “Personal Property”); (ii) certain office furniture, including desks, chairs and other office furniture (the “Stanford Property”); (iii) two automobiles, including a 2003 BMW Mini Cooper and a 1998 BMW Z3 Convertible (the “Davis Automobiles”); (iv) a 2000 COBIA open hull boat (the “Boat”); and (v) three automobiles, including a 2006 Nissan Frontier, a 2005 Chevrolet Trailblazer, and a 2003 Saturn Vue (the “Stanford Automobiles”). The Personal Property and the Stanford Property will be sold at public auction to be held on Saturday, May 12, 2012 at 10:00 AM at 4200 Blaffer St. Houston, Harris County, TX 77026. The Davis Automobiles will be sold at public auction to be held on Tuesday, May 15, 2012 at 9:00 am at Manheim, 14450 West Road, Houston, Harris County, TX 77041. The Boat will be sold at public auction to be held on Thursday, May 17, 2012 at 9:00 am at Copart Auto Auction, 5545 Swinnea Rd, Memphis, Shelby County, TN 38118. The Stanford Automobiles will be sold at public auction to be held on Tuesday, June 5, 2012 at 9:00 am at Manheim, 14450 West Road, Houston, Harris County, TX 77041. The Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Public Auction of Real Property in Harris County, Texas - On April 5, 2012, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of 5476 Holly Spring Drive in Houston, Texas. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Sentencing Hearing Scheduled in Stanford Criminal Case - On March 6, 2012, Robert Allen Stanford, the former Board of Directors Chairman of Stanford International Bank (SIB), was found guilty of orchestrating a 20-year investment fraud scheme in which he misappropriated $7 billion to finance his personal businesses and lifestyle. Following a six-week trial, the jury found Stanford guilty on 13 of 14 counts in the indictment. Stanford was convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud, four counts of wire fraud, five counts of mail fraud, one count of conspiracy to obstruct a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation, one count of obstruction of an SEC investigation and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering. Stanford was acquitted on one count of wire fraud (Count 2: 18 U.S.C. § 1343).

Mr. Stanford is scheduled to be sentenced on June 14, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 8A, 8th Floor, before U.S. District Court Judge David Hittner, United States Courthouse, 515 Rusk Avenue, Houston, Texas. Mr. Stanford faces a maximum prison sentence of 20 years for the count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud, each count of wire and mail fraud, and the count of conspiracy to commit money laundering, and five years for the count of conspiracy to obstruct an SEC investigation and the count of obstruction of an SEC investigation.

** If you have suffered losses as a result of the crimes committed by Mr. Stanford, you have the right to submit a Victim Impact Statement or letter in aid of sentencing to explain how the crimes affected you. Victim impact includes physical, emotional and/or financial loss. Victims who wish to submit a Victim Impact Statement and be heard in writing should do so by completing a Victim Impact Form (or a letter addressed to Judge David Hittner) and mailing it to Judge David Hittner at: Chambers, United States District Court, 515 Rusk Street, Room 8509, Houston TX 77002-2600. To be considered by the Court, the correspondence must be received by Judge Hittner’s Chambers no later than May 25, 2012. The Court will provide the Government and defense attorneys with copies of the Victim Impact Forms and victim letters.
Victims who wish to speak in person at the sentencing should mail their request to Judge Hittner’s Chambers, Attn: Stanford Case. The Court will permit two or three victims to speak and the Probation Office will notify the victims who will be permitted to speak. Also, if any group or organization would like to be heard at sentencing, they must also submit a written request to Judge Hittner’s Chambers. The Court will decide which organizations will be permitted to speak in coordination with the Probation Office and notify them closer to the sentencing date.

A copy of a Victim Impact Form can be found by clicking on the attached link http://www.justice.gov/criminal/vns/forms/victim-impact-statement-06.pdf .

For further details on this case or the case against Laura Pendergast-Holt, Gilberto Lopez and Mark Kuhrt, which will be tried before Judge Hittner on September 10, 2012, please go to www.justice.gov/criminal/vns/caseup/stanfordr.html .

Examiner's Comment Concerning Frozen Stanford Funds - On March 19, 2012, the Court-appointed Examiner posted a comment concerning the release of approximately $330 million of Stanford funds that have been frozen in Canada, the United Kingdom and Switzerland at the request of the Department of Justice. To view the Examiner's comment, click here.

Receiver Files Amended Motion To Establish Bar Date for Claims and Procedures for Submitting Proofs of Claim - The Receiver filed his First Motion for Entry of an Order Establishing a Bar Date on November 16, 2011 (“First Bar Date Motion”). Since that time, the Receiver has received comments, objections and other input from the Examiner, Investors Committee, and counsel for potential claimants concerning specific aspects of the proposed order and related notices submitted with the First Bar Date Motion. Additionally, the Examiner, Investors Committee and SEC have participated and consulted with the Receiver in interviewing various professional firms with specific expertise and experience in handling claims processing and validation in similar cases. That process has resulted in the Receiver’s decision, with which the SEC, Examiner, and Investors Committee concur, to select, and seek Court approval to retain, two firms to assist him in the claims and distribution process. As a result of this process, the Receiver filed his Amended Motion for Entry of an Order Establishing a Bar Date for Claims on March 16, 2012. The motion also seeks approval of the form and manner of notice of claims as well as the proof of claim form and procedures for submitting proofs of claim. To view a copy of the Receiver's amended motion, click here.

Once the Court rules on the amended motion establishing a bar date and approving the proof of claim form, the Receiver will provide notice on the Receivership website as well as through other methods approved by the Court. At that time, victims seeking to make a claim against the Receivership may complete and submit a proof of claim. Until the Court makes a decision regarding this motion, there is no action required on your part and the Receiver is not accepting proofs of claims.

The Receiver can not forecast when the Court will rule on this motion. Briefing on the Amended Motion should be complete in early April 2012, and the Receiver will move the Court to act on the Amended Motion as soon as possible thereafter. We recommend that you check the website, www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com periodically for communication updates.

Court Issues Order Granting Attorneys' Fees in Political Campaign Committee Cases - On March 6, 2012, the Court issued an order granting the Receiver's motion for attorneys' fees in his cases against the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Inc. and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Inc. as well as the National Republican Congressional Committee, the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the Republican National Committee. The Court previously granted the Receiver's motion for summary judgment on claims for recovery of all amounts paid to the Committees by R. Allen Stanford, James M. Davis, and Stanford Financial Group Company. (Click here to view a copy of the order).

District Court Order in Case Regarding SIPC Coverage - A federal court in the District of Columbia has entered an order granting the SEC's motion for SIPC to show cause why it should not be ordered to file an application to commence a liquidation proceeding with respect to Stanford in the Northern District of Texas pursuant to the Securities Investor Protection Act. The case will be handled as a "summary proceeding" pursuant to procedures that the Court will determine at a later time. To view a copy of the Court's memorandum and order, click here.

Receiver Files Complaint Against Thomas Sjoblom, Proskauer Rose, LLP and Chadbourne & Parke, LLP - On January 27, 2012, the Receiver, along with the Stanford Investors Committee, filed a complaint against Thomas Sjoblom, Proskauer Rose, LLP and Chadbourne & Parke, LLP in Federal District Court in Washington, D.C. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the defendants committed legal malpractice and aided and abetted Stanford Financial Group in the operation of a Ponzi scheme. To view a copy of the complaint, click here.

Trial Date Set in Stanford Criminal Case - On November 29, 2011, Judge Hittner issued a scheduling order as to Robert Allen Stanford. Jury Selection and trial are now set for January 23, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 8A. A final pre-trial conference is set for January 17, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. A competency hearing has also been set for December 20, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. The purpose of this hearing will be for the Court to address Robert Allen Stanford’s claim that due to various circumstances he is incompetent to stand trial in January.

Receiver Motion To Establish Bar Date for Claims and Procedures for Submitting Proofs of Claim - On November 16, 2011, the Receiver filed a motion with the District Court seeking an order establishing a bar date for claims against the Receivership Estate. In addition, the motion seeks approval of the form and manner of notice of claims as well as the proof of claim form and procedures for submitting proofs of claim. To view a copy of the Receiver's motion, click here.

Once the Court rules on the motion establishing a bar date and approving the proof of claim form, the Receiver will provide notice on the Receivership website as well as through other methods approved by the Court. At that time, victims seeking to make a claim against the Receivership may complete and submit a proof of claim. Until the Court makes a decision regarding this motion, there is no action required on your part and the Receiver is not accepting proofs of claims.

The Receiver does not expect a decision on this motion by the Court until later this year. We recommend that you check the website, www.stanfordfinancialreceivership.com periodically for communication updates.

Court Issues Order Denying Motion to Intervene - On November 14, 2011, the Court issued an order denying a motion by four former Stanford investors to intervene and for appointment to the Official Stanford Investors Committee. (click here to view a copy of the order).

Receiver's Third Interim Report Regarding Status of Receivership, Asset Collection and Ongoing Activities - On November 11, 2011, the Receiver filed a report with the Court that discusses the status of the Receivership, the Receivership's asset collection efforts and ongoing activities. To view the report, click here.

Notice of Public Auction of Miscellaneous Assets - The Receiver hereby posts this notice of his intention to sell to the highest qualified bidder(s) a 2007 Mercedes S600. The Mercedes S600 will be sold at public auction to be held on Tuesday, September 13, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. CST at Manheim Houston located at 14450 West Rd, Houston, Harris County, TX 77041. The Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Public Auction of Miscellaneous Assets - The Receiver hereby posts this notice of his intention to sell to the highest qualified bidder(s) certain personal property, including (i) a 1974 178 foot CD Holmes Rescue Tug known as the Robust Eagle and (ii) certain other miscellaneous assets located on the Robust Eagle. The miscellaneous assets will be sold at public auction to be held on Tuesday, September 6, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. EST at 1065 Bulkhead Road, Green Cove Springs, Clay County, Florida 32043.. The Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Public Auction of Real Property in Baldwyn, Lee and Prentiss Counties, Mississippi - On July 26, 2011, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of 101 & 103 West Main Street, 111 & 113 West Main Street, 107 East Main Street, 112 East Main Street and 108 Front Street, all in the Town of Baldwyn, Mississippi. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Court Issues Order Granting Summary Judgment - On June 22, 2011, the Court issued an order granting the Receiver's motion for summary judgment against the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Inc. and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Inc. as well as the National Republican Congressional Committee, the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the Republican National Committee on the Receiver's claims for recovery of all amounts paid to the Committees by R. Allen Stanford, James M. Davis, and Stanford Financial Group Company. (Click here to view a copy of the order).

Opinion of Appeals Court from Hearing Regarding Motion to Intervene - On June 20, 2011, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion affirming the District Court's denial of Stanford Condominium Association's motion to intervene in the receivership litigation or, alternatively, to proceed with arbitration. Click here for a copy of the opinion.

SEC Determination Regarding SIPC Coverage - The Receiver has received a copy of the SEC's Determination concerning SIPC coverage concerning the Stanford Ponzi Scheme. The Receiver is studying the determination and anticipates meeting with SEC and SIPC Representatives to discuss the details of assistance and coordination that the Receiver stands ready to provide concerning this matter. To view a copy of the analysis upon which the SEC's determination was made, click here.

Notice of the Status of United States v. Robert Allen Stanford - On May 10, 2011, Judge Hittner entered a scheduling order in U.S. v. Stanford, setting the trial date for Robert Allen Stanford for September 12, 2011. The other defendants are set to be tried following Stanford's trial. To view a copy of the scheduling order, click here.

For further details on United States v. Robert Allen Stanford, please go to www.justice.gov/criminal/vns/caseup/stanfordr.html.

Superseding Federal Criminal Indictment Against Robert Allen Stanford - On May 4, 2011, a grand jury returned a superseding indictment against Robert Allen Stanford. The superseding indictment adds to the notice of forfeiture additional bank accounts that have been uncovered in the criminal investigation. Adding these accounts to the forfeiture notice allows the United States to seek an order forfeiting these accounts (and repatriating the foreign funds to the United States) upon a conviction in Stanford's case. Any such forfeited funds would then be applied to a restitution order in favor of Stanford victims. In addition, since the district court severed Stanford's case from that of his codefendants, the superseding indictment focuses on Stanford's conduct that will be the focus of his trial. To view a copy of the indictment, click here.

Notice of Public Auction of Miscellaneous Assets - The Receiver hereby posts this notice of his intention to sell to the highest qualified bidder(s) certain personal property. The miscellaneous assets will be sold at public auction to be held on Saturday, June 4, 2011 at 10:00 AM at 4200 Blaffer St. Houston, Harris County, TX 77026. The Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Adjournment of Private Equity Auction - The Receiver previously announced the proposed sale on March 30, 2011 (subsequently adjourned to April 20, 2011) of Stanford Financial Group Company's 49,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.01, of Oasis Bank, S.S.B., a Texas-chartered savings bank with its main office in Houston, Texas. Pursuant to the Private Equity Sales Procedures adopted by the Receiver, the Receiver has again adjourned the proposed sale of shares of Oasis Bank and announced his intention to conduct the sale at 10:00 a.m. on April 27, 2011 at 2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2600, Dallas, Texas 75201. To see a copy of the notice of public auction of private equity investments relating to the investment in Oasis Bank, click here.

Notice of Public Auction of Miscellaneous Assets - The Receiver has entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of the following miscellaneous assets: (1) gym equipment (the “Gym Equipment”) and (ii) airplane parts, equipment and other related assets (the “Airplane Parts”). The Gym Equipment and the Airplane Parts will be sold at public auction to be held on Tuesday, May 3, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. at 100 Jim Davidson Drive, Sugar Land, Fort Bend County, Texas 77498. Pursuant to the Bidding Procedures adopted by the Receiver, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sales on the Receivership website for four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Public Auction of Remaining St. Croix Properties - On March 29, 2011, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of Royal Strand (Plots 2, 3, 4-A & B Strand Street & 43 B & C Queen Cross Street), Kings Alley (Plot Nos. 55 and 55-A King Street), Moonraker Building (Plot 43-A Queen Cross Street), and Plot 36-C Strand Street, Town of Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Private Equity Auction - The Receiver has entered into stalking horse contracts for the sale of the following private equity interests: (1) Stanford Venture Capital Holdings, Inc.'s (SVCH) 2.99% limited partner interest in ACON-Bastion Partners II, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership; (2) SVCH's 23.33% limited partner interest in ACON Investment Partners I, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and 11.09% limited partner interest in ACON Investment Partners II, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership; (3) SVCH's 50% ownership interest in ACON Triple Play Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; (4) Stanford Financial Group Company's 49,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.01, of Oasis Bank, S.S.B., a Texas-chartered savings bank with its main office in Houston, Texas; and (5) SIBL's 289,587 shares of Common Stock of WorthPoint Corporation, a Delaware corporation. Pursuant to the Private Equity Sales Procedures adopted by the Receiver, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sales on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Public Auction - Forefront Golf Facility, Baldwyn, MS - On February 24, 2011, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of 309 Robert M. Coggins, Jr. Drive, Baldwyn, Prentiss County, Mississippi. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Receiver's Second Interim Report Regarding Status of Receivership, Asset Collection and Ongoing Activities - On February 11, 2011, the Receiver filed a report with the Court that discusses the status of the Receivership, the Receivership's asset collection efforts and ongoing activities. To view the report, click here.

Notice of the Status of United States v. Robert Allen Stanford et al. - On January 6, 2011, Judge Hittner held a hearing in U.S. v. Stanford that covered a defense request for a continuance and defendant Stanford's competency to stand trial. Stanford's new attorney was seeking a two-year delay to prepare for trial. Citing, among other things, the interest of the victims in a speedy disposition of the hundreds of millions of dollars of investor funds currently frozen, the government opposed the defendant's motion for a two year continuance. The court granted a continuance of unspecified duration and issued an order finding that Stanford is currently incompetent to stand trial. Stanford was remanded by the court to the custody of the Attorney General for an undetermined period to undergo further psychiatric evaluation and testing at a medical facility within the Federal Bureau of Prisons. As a result, no new trial date has been set for Stanford. The other defendants are set to be tried following Stanford's trial.

For further details on United States v. Robert Allen Stanford, please go to www.justice.gov/criminal/vns/caseup/stanfordr.html

Notice of Public Auction - Collierville, TN - On January 25, 2011, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of 1169 Oak Timber Circle, Unit 39, in The Oaks at Schilling Farms Condominiums, Shelby County, Collierville, Tennessee. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Public Auction - Tupelo, MS - On January 14, 2011, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of 110 East Main Street, Tupelo, Lee County, Mississippi. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Huntingdon Property Sale - On January 5, 2011, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of 2121 Kirby Drive, Unit 16NE in The Huntingdon, Houston, Texas. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Private Equity Auction - The Receiver has entered into stalking horse contracts for the sale of the following private equity interests: (1) 19.79% limited partner interest in Louisiana Ventures, L.P., (2) 10,000,000 Series E Preferred Shares and 5,000,000 Series E Preferred Warrants of Gigamedia Access Corporation and (3) 4,000 shares of stock of Mountain Partners AG, 2,120,635 shares of Mountain Super Angel, 2,226,666 shares of Cleantech Invest AG and 2,226,666 shares of Bluehill ID AG. Pursuant to the Private Equity Sales Procedures adopted by the Receiver, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sales on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Anchor Inn Public Auction - On December 29, 2010, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of Anchor Inn, Plot Rem. 58 and 58A King Street, Town of Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Notice of Bjerget House Public Auction - On December 20, 2010, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of Bjerget House and Solhoj House (Plot Nos. 55, 56, 57, 58, 59 and Lot X of Hill Street and Plot Nos. 3 and 4 Queen Street and Plot Nos. 3 and 4 Hill Street and Remainder Plot No. 64 and Plot No. 64-A East Street), Town of Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Opinion of Appeals Court from Hearing Regarding Frozen Financial Advisor Accounts - On December 15, 2010, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion affirming the preliminary injunction against certain former financial advisors and employees of SGC, freezing over $24 million in assets in the accounts of those individuals pending the outcome of trial. Click here for a copy of the opinion.

Receiver Files Complaint Against Susan Stanford — On November 15, 2010, the Receiver filed a complaint against R. Allen Stanford's wife Susan Stanford. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against Susan Stanford to recover more than $2.9 million in CD proceeds that she received. Moreover, the Receiver asserted an unjust-enrichment claim against Mrs. Stanford for her occupation of, access to, and use of a mansion and other property owned by the Stanford Parties. To see a copy of the complaint, click here.

Receiver Files Complaint Against Juan Rodriguez-Tolentino, Sonia G. Velez, and Wilfrido Velez — On November 12, 2010, the Receiver filed a complaint against SIBL President Juan Rodriguez-Tolentino, his wife Sonia G. Velez, and their relative Wilfrido Velez. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust enrichment claims against Tolentino and the Velezes to recover over $2.3 million in CD proceeds that they received. To see a copy of the complaint, click here.

Receiver Files Complaint Against Dillon Gage — On September 30, 2010, the Receiver filed a complaint against Dillon Gage Inc. of Dallas and Dillon Gage Inc. (collectively, "Dillon Gage"). Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against Dillon Gage for the recovery of CD proceeds that Dillon Gage received and that total over $5 million. To see a copy of the complaint, click here.

Receiver Files Complaint Against Oreste Tonarelli — On September 29, 2010, the Receiver filed a complaint against Oreste Tonarelli. Tonarelli is a former managing director of Stanford Group Company's Private Clients Group in Miami. He was also a Training Director for Stanford Financial Group Company tasked with, among other things, training SIBL CD salespersons on how best to sell the SIBL CD. Tonarelli played a vital role in expanding and perpetuating the Stanford Ponzi scheme by both pushing sales of SIBL CDs and by training others to sell SIBL CDs to investors in existing and untapped markets, including Latin America. The Receiver has asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against Tonarelli to recover the more than $3.1 million in CD proceeds he received. To see a copy of the complaint, click here.

Receiver Files Complaint Against Andrea M. Stoelker — On June 28, 2010, the Receiver filed a complaint against Andrea M. Stoelker, who is the former president of Stanford Financial Group Management LLC and Stanford 20/20, as well as R. Allen Stanford's girlfriend and/or fiancée. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against Stoelker to recover over $560,000.00 in SIBL CD proceeds that she received. To see a copy of the complaint, click here.

Notice of Public Auction of Real Property in Fort Bend County, Texas - On July 23, 2010, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of 100 Jim Davidson Drive, Sugar Land, Texas. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Stanford Receiver, Examiner and Victims Announce Formation of Official Committee to Represent Victims' Interests - On August 30, 2010, the Stanford Receiver, Examiner and victims of the Stanford "ponzi" scheme announced the formation of an official committee to represent victims' interest. To see a copy of the joint statement, click here.

Receiver Files Complaint Against Merge Healthcare, Inc. — On July 26, 2010, the Receiver filed a complaint against Merge Healthcare, Inc (“Merge”). The Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against Merge to recover $9 million that the Stanford Defendants transferred to Merge in February 2009. The see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

Stanford International Bank, Ltd. formerly held a substantial majority interest in an entity named Health Systems Solutions, Inc. and, since 1998, had invested approximately $40 million in HSS and its predecessor company Provider Solutions Corp. SIBL’s interest in HSS was just one of many illiquid private equity investments that were funded through the use of proceeds from the sale of fraudulent SIBL CDs.

In October 2008, HSS entered into an agreement to purchase Emageon, Inc. Stanford used SIBL to provide financing for the purchase and caused SIBL to divert $9 million in SIBL CD proceeds to fund an escrow account pursuant to a financing agreement related to the purchase. Up until a few days before the Receiver was appointed, that $9 million was still held in the escrow account. But when the purchase did not close by February 11, 2009, the $9 million held in escrow was released to Emageon per HSS's and Emageon's agreement. The failure to close, which occurred immediately prior to the Receiver’s appointment, was most likely due to the Stanford enterprise’s illiquid assets, lack of money, and insolvency. In 2009, the Court approved the Receiver’s sale of SIBL’s interests in HSS for $700,000.

On April 2, 2009, Emageon was acquired by Amicas, Inc.; on February 28, 2010, Amicas merged with Merge Healthcare Incorporated. The Receiver has asserted a fraudulent-transfer claim against Merge to recover the $9 million it received from SIBL. The Receiver has not alleged that Merge committed fraud. Rather, in this fraudulent-transfer action, the Receiver need only allege and prove that Merge received the funds from a Ponzi scheme. Payments from a Ponzi scheme are by definition payments made with intent to defraud other creditors, which is the essence of a fraudulent-transfer claim. The burden is on Merge to show that it both received the funds in good faith and that it provided reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the funds. In return for the $9 million payment, Stanford received nothing that is of any value to the creditors of the Stanford entities or the victims of the Stanford fraud. Because Merge cannot show that it provided any value — let alone reasonably equivalent value — in exchange for the $9 million, the Receiver is entitled to the return of such funds as a matter of law, irrespective of good faith.

On July 16, 2010, the Receiver filed a Complaint against certain former Stanford employees who invested in Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (“SIBL”) CDs. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against 77 former employee investors whom he has identified as having received CD proceeds from SIBL. Collectively, these 77 former employee investors received over $27 million in such CD proceeds. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

Receiver's Interim Report Regarding Status of Receivership, Asset Collection and Ongoing Activities - On July 1, 2010, the Receiver filed a report with the Court that discusses the status of the Receivership, the Receivership's asset collection efforts and ongoing activities. To view the report, click here.

Court Issues Order Granting Preliminary Injunction - On June 10, 2010, the Court issued an order granting the Receiver’s application for a preliminary injunction that enjoins certain former Stanford employees from removing approximately $24 million in funds currently frozen in Stanford brokerage accounts located at Pershing LLC and JP Morgan Clearing Corp., unless funds in the accounts exceed the total of: (1) commissions earned from the sale of Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIB) certificates of deposit; (2) SIB quarterly bonuses; and (3) branch managing-director quarterly compensation. The Receiver is currently pursuing fraudulent transfer claims against these former employees and, if successful, would use such frozen accounts to satisfy any settlements reached or judgments rendered in the Receiver’s favor. (Click here to view the order.)

Receiver Files Additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors - On May 18, 2010, the Receiver filed an additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against an additional 65 investors whom he has identified as having received CD Proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments — that is, investors who received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but also additional amounts in the form of purported interest or other payments. Collectively, these 65 investors received over $41.8 million in total CD Proceeds, with over $6.9 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

In total, the Receiver has sued 844 investors who received funds in excess of their SIBL investments. All combined, these 844 investors received over $1.23 billion from SIBL, with over $216.1 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. The Receiver continues to encourage all investors who are interested in discussing settlement to contact the Receiver's counsel to arrange for the return of the funds they received in excess of their investments.

Thus far, the Receiver has finalized 57 settlements totaling over $3.7 million and is in discussions with other investors or their counsel to achieve further settlements. The investor funds that the Receiver recovers in these settlements will help provide compensation to investors who suffered significant or total losses of their SIBL CD investments.

Notice of Public Auction for Sale of 5050 Westheimer, Houston, Texas - On May 18, 2010, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of 5050 Westheimer, Houston, Texas. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Receiver Files Additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors - On May 7, 2010, the Receiver filed an additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against an additional 41 investors whom he has identified as having received CD Proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments Ñ that is, investors who received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but also additional amounts in the form of purported interest payments. Collectively, these 41 investors received over $18.3 million in total CD Proceeds, with over $3.2 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

In total, the Receiver has sued 784 investors who received funds in excess of their SIBL investments. All combined, these 784 investors received over $1.2 billion from SIBL, with over $209.6 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. The Receiver's investigation is ongoing, and he expects to identify additional investors who received excess SIBL funds. The Receiver continues to encourage all investors who are interested in discussing settlement to contact the Receiver's counsel to arrange for the return of the funds they received in excess of their investments.

Thus far, the Receiver has finalized 52 settlements totaling over $3.5 million and is in discussions with other investors or their counsel to achieve further settlements. The investor funds that the Receiver recovers in these settlements will help provide compensation to investors who suffered significant or total losses of their SIBL CD investments.

Receiver Files Additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors - On April 27, 2010, the Receiver filed an additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against an additional 34 investors whom he has identified as having received CD Proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments — that is, investors who received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but also additional amounts in the form of purported interest payments. Collectively, these 34 investors received over $15.1 million in total CD Proceeds, with over $2.3 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

In total, the Receiver has sued 745 investors who received funds in excess of their SIBL investments. All combined, these 745 investors received over $1.18 billion from SIBL, with over $206.4 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. The Receiver's investigation is ongoing, and he expects to identify additional investors who received excess SIBL funds. The Receiver continues to encourage all investors who are interested in discussing settlement to contact the Receiver's counsel to arrange for the return of the funds they received in excess of their investments.

Thus far, the Receiver has finalized 50 settlements totaling over $3.3 million and is in discussions with other investors or their counsel to achieve further settlements. The investor funds that the Receiver recovers in these settlements will help provide compensation to investors who suffered significant or total losses of their SIBL CD investments.

Receiver Files Complaint Against Interim Executive Management, Inc. - On April 23, 2010, the Receiver filed a complaint against Interim Executive Management, Inc. (IEM), a management consulting company with offices in Germantown, Tennessee. The Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against IEM to recover over $4 million that the Stanford Defendants transferred to IEM between 2006 and 2009. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

Receiver Files Application for TRO, Preliminary Injunction, and Writ of Attachment Concerning Accounts of Former Stanford Employees - On April 19, 2010 the Receiver filed an Application which seeks to prevent the withdrawal or transfer of assets held in accounts owned by the former Stanford employees named in the Receiver's Second Amended Complaint Against Former Stanford Employees. Those accounts, which are held at Pershing, SEI, JPMCC, and Stanford Coins & Bullion, hold assets worth over $24 million, and represent the Receiver's best chance to recover on his fraudulent-transfer and unjust-enrichment claims against the former employees who own the accounts; those claims are worth more than $139 million. As set forth in the Application, the Receiver is likely to recover on his claims against these former employees--all of whom profited directly from the sale of SIBL CDs to investors -- and recovering these funds from the former employees will assist in the Receiver's efforts to provide compensation to the victims of the Stanford fraud and others with claims against the Estate. To view a copy of the Application, click here.

Receiver files additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors - On April 8, 2010, the Receiver filed an additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against an additional 43 investors whom he has identified as having received CD Proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments — that is, investors who received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but also additional amounts in the form of purported interest payments. Collectively, these 43 investors received over $19.6 million in total CD Proceeds, with over $4 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

In total, the Receiver has sued 715 investors who received funds in excess of their SIBL investments. All combined, these 715 investors received over $1.17 billion from SIBL, with over $204.4 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. The Receiver's investigation is ongoing, and he expects to identify additional investors who received excess SIBL funds. The Receiver continues to encourage all investors who are interested in discussing settlement to contact the Receiver's counsel to arrange for the return of the funds they received in excess of their investments.

Thus far, the Receiver has finalized 46 settlements totaling over $3.14 million and is in discussions with other investors or their counsel to achieve further settlements. The investor funds that the Receiver recovers in these settlements will help provide compensation to investors who suffered significant or total losses of their SIBL CD investments.

Notice of Public Auction for Sale of 20 Casuarina, Coral Gables, Florida - On March 29, 2010, the Receiver entered into a stalking horse contract for the sale of 20 Casuarina, Coral Gables, Florida. Pursuant to the Order Approving Procedures for Sales of Real Property by the Receiver, entered by the Court on January 26, 2010, the Receiver is required to provide notice of the proposed sale on the Receivership website for at least four weeks prior to the sale. To see a copy of the notice, click here.

Receiver files additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors - On March 29, 2010, the Receiver filed an additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against an additional 36 investors whom he has identified as having received CD Proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments — that is, investors who received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but also additional amounts in the form of purported interest payments. Collectively, these 36 investors received over $15.8 million in total CD Proceeds, with over $3.6 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

In total, the Receiver has sued 674 investors who received funds in excess of their SIBL investments. All combined, these 674 investors received over $1.153 billion from SIBL, with over $200.5 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. The Receiver's investigation is ongoing, and he expects to identify additional investors who received excess SIBL funds. The Receiver encourages all investors who are interested in discussing settlement to contact the Receiver's counsel to arrange for the return of the funds they received in excess of their investments.

Thus far, the Receiver has finalized 44 settlements totaling over $3.07 million and is in discussions with other investors or their counsel to achieve further settlements. The investor funds that the Receiver recovers in these settlements will help provide compensation to investors who suffered significant or total losses of their SIBL CD investments.

Stanford Receiver and Victims Announce Agreement on Formation of Official Committee to Represent Victims' Interests - On March 30, 2010, the Stanford Receiver and victims of the Stanford "ponzi" scheme announced an agreement to form an official committee to represent victims' interest. To see a copy of the press release, click here.

Receiver files additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors - On March 15, 2010, the Receiver filed an additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against an additional 36 investors whom he has identified as having received CD Proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments – that is, investors who received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but also additional amounts in the form of purported interest payments. Collectively, these 36 investors received over $17.3 million in total CD Proceeds, with over $3.6 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

In total, the Receiver has sued 645 investors who received funds in excess of their SIBL investments. All combined, these 645 investors received over $1.144 billion from SIBL, with over $197.4 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. The Receiver's investigation is ongoing, and he expects to identify additional investors who received excess SIBL funds. The Receiver encourages all investors who are interested in discussing settlement to contact the Receiver's counsel to arrange for the return of the funds they received in excess of their investments.

Receiver files Complaints Against Wealth Management Services, Ltd. and additional Stanford Investors - On March 8, 2010, the Receiver filed a Complaint Against Wealth Management Services, Ltd. (WMSL), a consulting company owned and operated by David Nanes, a former Stanford financial advisor. The Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against WMSL to recover over $9.8 million in bonus payments and consulting, marketing, branding, and other fees that the Stanford Defendants transferred to WMSL. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

On the same day, the Receiver filed an additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against an additional 62 investors whom he has identified as having received CD Proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments — that is, investors who received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but also additional amounts in the form of purported interest payments. Collectively, these 62 investors received over $38 million in total CD Proceeds, with over $5.6 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

In total, the Receiver has sued 612 investors who received funds in excess of their SIBL investments. All combined, these 612 investors received over $1.1 billion from SIBL, with over $193 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. The Receiver's investigation is ongoing, and he expects to identify additional investors who received excess SIBL funds. The Receiver encourages all investors who are interested in discussing settlement to contact the Receiver's counsel to arrange for the return of the funds they received in excess of their investments.

Thus far, the Receiver has finalized 37 settlements totaling over $2.7 million and is in discussions with other investors or their counsel to achieve further settlements. The investor funds that the Receiver recovers in these settlements will help provide compensation to investors who suffered significant or total losses of their SIBL CD investments.

Receiver files additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors - On March 1, 2010, the Receiver filed an additional Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors. Specifically, the Receiver asserted fraudulent-transfer and, in the alternative, unjust-enrichment claims against an additional 54 investors whom he has identified as having received CD Proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments Ñthat is, investors who received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but also additional amounts in the form of purported interest payments. Collectively, these investors received over $30 million in total CD Proceeds, with over $5.9 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

Judge Orders Carlos Loumiet and Hunton & Williams to Produce Information to Receiver - On March 1, 2010, today, the Court entered an order compelling Mr. Carlos Loumiet and the law firm of Hunton & Williams LLP to deliver to the Receiver all files and billing records related to the legal services rendered on behalf of various foreign Stanford entities including, among others, Stanford International Bank, Ltd. The Receiver believes that the information contained within such records may assist with asset identification and recovery efforts. To view a copy of the order, click here.

Status Gagosian Litigation - Based on the orders issued on February 26, 2010, the Court will address the substantive claims of each of the affected parties in due course and in the separate lawsuit filed by Gagosian Gallery. The Court denied the requests for interim or expedited relief made by the Gallery and the Receiver in the SEC action, indicating that multiple factual issues need to be resolved before final rulings can be made. The Court determined that there is no immediate threat of irreparable harm that would justify granting emergency relief before the factual disputes are resolved.

United Kingdom Court Order - On February 25, 2010, the English Court of Appeal ruled that the Antiguan Liquidators are the recognized foreign representatives of Stanford International Bank (SIB) in the United Kingdom, but that SIB funds located in the United Kingdom are subject to a restraint order obtained by the UK Serious Fraud Office at the request of the United States Department of Justice.

Ralph Janvey, the US court-appointed Receiver, agrees with the Court of Appeal’s decision upholding the restraint order. That order preserves the UK funds, subject to further legal proceedings, so that the funds ultimately can be transferred to the US Department of Justice and distributed to SIB investors.

The US Receiver disagrees with the English Court of Appeal’s decision to recognize the Antiguan Liquidators but not the US Receivership. The Court of Appeal declined to recognize the US Receiver as a foreign representative of SIB because, it concluded, the US receivership is not an insolvency proceeding. The Court's conclusion is wrong because the US Receivership clearly is an insolvency proceeding. SIB is dramatically insolvent, it is being liquidated for the benefit of creditors under the supervision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, and a distribution ultimately will be made pursuant to a court-approved distribution plan.

The US Receiver also disagrees with the English Court of Appeal’s ruling that SIB’s “center of main interests” is Antigua, not the United States. In arriving at this conclusion, the Court of Appeal incorrectly declined to consider that SIB was one of many Stanford entities used in the perpetration of a massive Ponzi scheme that was orchestrated from the United States and US territories. Indeed, under US law an entity’s principal place of business (equivalent to “center of main interests”) is where its “nerve center” is. The US Supreme Court reiterated that rule just this week. SIB’s nerve center was the United States.

The US District Court appointed the US Receiver to take possession of all SIB assets wherever situated, and the US Receiver became involved in the UK litigation only after the Antiguan Liquidators sought recognition in the UK so as to obtain more than $100 million in SIB funds that are on deposit in the UK. In order to preserve this large sum for distribution in a US-administered proceeding, it was necessary for the U.S. Receiver to oppose the Antiguan Liquidators’ application for recognition and to present the US Receivership as the appropriate vehicle for winding-up SIB’s affairs and fairly distributing its assets.

The US Receiver hopes that on-going discussions with the Antiguan Liquidators will lead to a resolution of the various disputes concerning SIB’s assets. A resolution would benefit investors.

Receiver files Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors - On February 23, 2010, the Receiver filed a Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors. The Stanford Investors named in the Complaint were previously named in the Receiver's February 18th and February 22nd supplemental complaints. To see a copy of the Complaint, click here.

Receiver Files Lawsuit to Enforce Return of Political Contributions - In furtherance of his court-ordered duty to take control of all assets of the Receivership Estate, the Receiver filed a lawsuit on Friday, February 19, 2010 against the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Inc.; the National Republican Congressional Committee; the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Inc.; the Republican National Committee; and the National Republican Senatorial Committee (collectively, the “Committee Defendants”).

While operating a massive Ponzi scheme, Allen Stanford, James Davis, and the Stanford Financial Group contributed more than $1.8 million of their ill-gotten gains to a variety of political organizations and candidates. The Committee Defendants received more than $1.6 million in funds that were ultimately traceable to money that investors paid for the purchase of fraudulent Stanford CDs. The Committee Defendants furnished no consideration for the funds they received. Consequently, they have no legitimate right to retain the funds, and the Receiver is entitled to the return of the funds for the benefit of claimants injured by the fraud orchestrated by Stanford, Davis, and others.

Before filing the lawsuit, the Receiver had made written requests to the Committee Defendants for return of the funds, first in February 2009, and again in February 2010. The Committee Defendants, however, ignored the Receiver’s requests, and, as a result, the Receiver was forced to file the lawsuit to obtain the return of the funds for the benefit of claimants. To view a copy of the complaint, click here.

Receiver files Supplemental Complaints Against Certain Stanford Investors and Former Stanford Employees -- On February 18, 2010, the Receiver filed a Supplemental Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors, in supplement to the Receiver’s First Amended Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors. Like the First Amended Complaint, the supplemental complaint asserts claims against the investors under fraudulent-transfer law and equitable principles of unjust enrichment. Specifically, the Receiver has asserted claims against 257 additional investors whom he has identified as having received CD Proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments — that is, investors who received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but also additional amounts in the form of purported interest payments. Collectively, these investors received over $508 million in total CD Proceeds, with over $87 million of the total representing amounts they received in excess of their investments. To see a copy of the supplemental complaint against the investors, click here.

On the same day, the Receiver also filed a Supplemental Complaint Against Former Stanford Employees. This supplemental complaint was filed in supplement to the Receiver’s Second Amended Complaint Against Former Stanford Employees. Like the Second Amended Complaint, the supplemental complaint asserts fraudulent-transfer and unjust-enrichment claims against the former employees. In particular, the supplemental complaint seeks to recover from 99 former Stanford employees Proceeds they received from CDs in which they invested, in addition to the other categories of CD Proceeds identified in the Second Amended Complaint — namely Loans, SIBL CD Commissions, SIBL Quarterly Bonuses, PARS Payments, Branch Managing Director Quarterly Compensation, and Severance Payments. All combined, these 99 employees received over $51 million in Proceeds from their CDs, and 26 of them collectively received over $1 million in Proceeds in excess of their total CD investments. To see a copy of the supplemental complaint against the former employees, click here.

Receiver Sends Settlement Offers to Additional Stanford Investors – The Receiver has identified 185 additional investors who received CD proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments. Like the defendants the Receiver sued in his December 7, 2009 First Amended Complaint Against Certain Stanford Investors, these 185 investors received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but also excess amounts in the form of purported interest payments. The funds used to make payments to these investors came from investments made by other investors.

Before filing a lawsuit against these 185 investors, the Receiver has sent them correspondence offering to settle the claims in exchange for return of the payment of the amounts they received in excess of their investments in SIBL CDs. Investors who intend to accept the Receiver’s proposal should contact the Receiver’s counsel to arrange for settlement.

Thus far, the Receiver has finalized 34 settlements totaling approximately $2.6 million, is in the process of finalizing additional settlements for over $500,000, and is in discussions with other investors or their counsel to achieve further settlements. The investor funds that the Receiver recovers in these settlements will help provide compensation to investors who suffered significant or total losses of their SIBL CD investments.

The Receiver's investigation is ongoing, and he expects to identify other investors who received from SIBL amounts in excess of their investments. The Receiver encourages all investors who received proceeds in excess of their CD investments and who are interested in discussing settlement to contact the Receiver's counsel, regardless of whether they have received settlement correspondence from the Receiver.

Court Approves Agreement Amongst SEC, Receiver and Examiner regarding All Outstanding Fee Applications - On February 3, 2010, the Court approved a proposed order submitted by the SEC, the Receiver and the Examiner with regard to all fee applications pending, by both the Receiver and the Examiner. Click here for a copy of the order.

Process for Release of Coins and Bullion - On January 19, 2010, the Receiver posted information regarding the release of coins and bullion held by the Receivership to Stanford Coins and Bullion (SCB) customers in accordance with the recent Court order granting in part the Receiver and Examiner’s joint motion regarding coin and bullion assets. To review a copy of this information, click here.

2009 W-2 forms for Employees - W-2 forms representing wages/income earned in 2009 for current and former Stanford employees are expected to mail no later than the end of January, 2010. If your address has changed, please contact the Receivership at 713.964.6301 or toll free at 866.964.6301.

Transfer of Remaining Brokerage Accounts Not Subject to Court Freeze - On November 13, 2009, the Court entered an Order granting the Receiver’s Motion seeking approval to transfer any remaining Stanford Group Company brokerage accounts that are no longer subject to the Court's freeze order to Dominick & Dominick LLC. Both Stanford Group Company and Dominick and Dominick LLC use Pershing, LLC as their clearing agent.

The transfer applies to Stanford Group Company brokerage accounts that have been released but that have not been transferred away from Stanford Group Company. On November 27, 2009, the Receiver sent a notice to all customers whose accounts were subject to this transfer. These Stanford Group Company customers were advised that if they did not transfer their accounts to a firm of their choice by January 13, 2010 , their accounts would be transferred to Dominick and Dominick LLC, effective January 20, 2010.

Customer transactions and other account servicing needs should be directed to Dominick and Dominick at 800-221-2869 beginning Wednesday, January 20, 2010. In addition, Dominick and Dominick LLC will be contacting each customer to assist in the transition.

Settlements of Claims Against Certain CD Investors - The Receiver is currently pursuing fraudulent-transfer and unjust-enrichment claims against 198 Stanford investors who received over $93.3 million in proceeds in excess of their SIBL CD investments. In November 2009, the Receiver began contacting numerous Stanford investors with offers to settle the claims against them in exchange for payment of the amounts they received in excess of their SIBL CD investments. Thus far, the Receiver has finalized more than 30 settlements totaling over $1.8 million, is in the process of finalizing additional settlements for over $1 million, and is in discussions with many other investors or their counsel to achieve further settlements. The investor funds that the Receiver recovers in these settlements will help provide compensation to investors who suffered significant or total losses of their SIBL CD investments. The Receiver encourages all investors who received proceeds in excess of their CD investments and who are interested in discussing settlement to contact the Receiver's counsel.

Cancellation of Chapter 15 Hearing (Vantis) - The District Court has cancelled the previously scheduled hearing on the motion of Peter Wastell and Nigel Hamilton-Smith, Antiguan-appointed liquidators of Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (“SIBL”), for recognition, under Chapter 15 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, as SIBL’s representatives in the United States. The hearing had been scheduled to take place on January 21, 2010. To view a copy of the Court's order, click here.

Order Regarding Coins and Bullion - On January 5, 2010, the Court granted in part the Receiver and Examiner's joint motion regarding coin and bullion assets. To review a copy of the order, click here. The Receiver is preparing for the release of coins and bullion held by the Receivership to Stanford Coins and Bullion (SCB) customers in accordance with the order. Additional information regarding this process will posted on the Receiver's website as soon as it is available. Please do not contact the Court for information with respect to the return of your coins or bullion.

Cooperation Offer - On December 11, 2009, the Receiver sent a counter-offer to Vantis regarding cooperation in order to resolve ongoing disputes over assets worldwide for the benefit of claimants against Stanford International Bank, Ltd. Vantis’ proposal and the Receiver’s responsive proposal can be found here and here.

Receiver Files Amended Complaint as to Certain Stanford Investors - On Monday, December 7, 2009, the Receiver filed his First Amended Complaint as to Certain Stanford Investors. This amended complaint is in response to the Fifth Circuit's ruling on November 13 that the Receiver cannot pursue claims against investors under a relief defendant theory. The amended complaint asserts claims against certain Stanford investors under fraudulent transfer law and equitable principles of unjust enrichment. Specifically, the Receiver has asserted claims against investors whom he has identified have received CD proceeds from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (SIBL) in excess of their total investments -- that is, investors who received not only amounts equal to their principal investment, but additional amounts in the form of purported interest payments. The funds used to make payments to these investors simply came from investments made by other investors. The Receiver's investigation is on-going and he expects to identify other investors who received from SIBL amounts in excess of their investments.

Prior to filing this amended complaint, the Receiver contacted those investors named in the complaint and offered to settle the claims against them in exchange for the return of the payment of the amounts they received in excess of their investments in SIBL CDs. Some investors accepted the Receiver’s proposal prior to the filing of the amended complaint, and the Receiver is in discussions with many other investors, or their counsel, and expects to conclude additional settlements with a number of the Stanford investors named in the amended complaint. Any investor with whom the Receiver concludes a settlement will be dismissed from the complaint.

The Receiver encourages any investor named as a defendant who is interested in discussing settlement to contact the Receiver's counsel if the investor has not already done so.

The funds obtained from these settlements will be an important source of compensation to those investors who have incurred significant losses, and in thousands of cases a total loss, of their investment in SIBL CD's.

To see a copy of the amended complaint, click here.

Order Regarding IRS's "John Doe" Summons - On December 3, 2009, the Court granted the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") permission to serve the Receiver with a "John Doe" summons seeking information about U.S. investors in Stanford CDs, stating that there is a reasonable basis for the IRS to believe that Stanford investors may fail or may have failed to comply with tax laws. To view a copy of the Order, click here.

Chapter 15 Hearing (Vantis) -- The District Court has scheduled a hearing on the motion of Peter Wastell and Nigel Hamilton-Smith, Antiguan-appointed liquidators of Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (“SIBL”), for recognition, under Chapter 15 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, as SIBL’s representatives in the United States. Mr. Wastell and Mr. Hamilton-Smith seek to have SIBL removed from the US-administered receivership and instead liquidated through a proceeding administered by the Antiguan judiciary. The US Receiver, Mr. Janvey, opposes the motion, as does the Securities Exchange Commission. The hearing is scheduled for two days beginning at 9 AM, Thursday, January 21, 2010, in the courtroom of Judge David Godbey, 1100 Commerce Street, Dallas, TX 75242. To view a copy of the Court's order, click here.

Release of Remaining Frozen Investor Accounts Following Fifth Circuit Ruling Regarding Claw Backs - Following the ruling of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday, November 13, 2009, investor accounts, previously subject to the Freeze Order, are now available for release. The ruling does not affect the freeze which remains in effect as to accounts held by former Stanford employees and brokers.

Stanford Group Company (SGC) Accounts - To transfer an eligible brokerage account away from Stanford Group Company, you need to contact a new brokerage firm and open a new account with them. You will need to verify that the new firm can take all of the positions in your account, including mutual funds and annuities, you wish to transfer. As part of the account opening process, one of the forms you will be asked by your new firm to fill out is a transfer form referred to as an ACATS form. Once that has been completed, your new firm may begin the account transfer process by presenting the completed ACATS form to Pershing or J.P. Morgan through the ACATS system. If your account is an IRA, please contact your new firm regarding advice as to how to set up a new IRA account so that you may effect the transfer without incurring penalties. The Receivership Estate will absorb the fees associated with the ACATS transfer process, as well as any maintenance and termination fees associated with the transfer of any IRAs. However, the Receivership will not pay any fees charged by your new financial institution.

Stanford Trust Company (STC) – IRA/Brokerage/Agency/Custody Accounts - To transfer such an account you must contact a new trust company, brokerage firm or other financial institution and open a new account with them. As part of the account transfer process, one of the forms your new firm may ask you to fill out is a transfer form referred to as an ACATS form. Once that has been completed, your new firm may begin the account transfer process by presenting the completed ACATS form to SEI Private Trust Company (“SEI” is a private trust company not affiliated with the Stanford companies that acts as the STC asset custodian) through the ACATS system. If your account is an IRA account, please contact your new firm regarding the procedures for opening a new IRA to ensure that when you transfer your STC IRA you will not trigger any tax penalties related to an inadvertent early withdrawal.

Stanford Trust Company (STC) and other Fiduciary Accounts - To transfer your STC trust or other fiduciary account for which STC served as a trustee or other fiduciary, whether sole or joint, you should contact a new trust company or other financial institution you wish to serve as successor trustee or fiduciary. You should confirm that the new entity is authorized to serve as a trustee or fiduciary and discuss with its representatives the documents required to transfer your trust or other fiduciary account. You may also want to discuss with your attorney the documents required to appoint a successor trustee or other fiduciary and the procedures necessary to transfer your account. A successor trustee or fiduciary must be appointed in accordance with the provisions of the governing trust or fiduciary instrument, which often expressly grants the power to appoint a successor to certain individuals. In some cases, if the trust instrument does not address the power to appoint a successor trustee or fiduciary, court approval will be necessary to transfer your trust or other fiduciary account to a successor trustee or fiduciary. As part of the account transfer process, your new trust company, or, if applicable, your legal counsel, should prepare the necessary documentation required to appoint a successor trustee or fiduciary and to transfer your assets to such institution. All signatures must be notarized by a notary public, and transfer requests involving account assets must be signature guaranteed with a Medallion Stamp. Once these documents are complete, they should be sent to the following address:

Stanford Trust Company
5050 Westheimer
Houston, TX 77056

This documentation will be reviewed, and if proper authority and notarized signatures are present as required by the individual trust document, the Receiver will instruct SEI Private Trust Company (“SEI” is a private trust company not affiliated with the Stanford companies that acts as the STC asset custodian) to transfer the assets to your new account at your new financial institution.

If you wish to close your account (as opposed to moving it to a new institution) you should contact the Receiver’s representatives and inform them that you wish to close your account and receive a distribution of your account.

If you require further assistance, please call the numbers established by the Receivership (1-866-964-6301 or 713-964-6300).

Opinion of Appeals Court from Hearing Regarding Claw Backs - On November 13, 2009, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion from the hearing regarding clawbacks. Click here for a copy of the opinion.

Transcript of Appeals Court Hearing Regarding Claw Backs -- The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held a hearing on November 2, 2009. Click here for a transcript of such hearing. When a decision has been issued a notice of such decision will be posted on the website.

Receiver’s Interim Report on Assets and Cost Reductions - On October 28, 2009, the Receiver filed a report with the Court that discusses the Receivership's asset collection efforts to date. To view the report, click here.

Stanford University Trademark Litigation - On September 24, 2009, the Receiver entered into a Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release with The Board of Trustees of The Leland Stanford Junior University, pursuant to which the parties settled and resolved all disputes, differences, claims and counterclaims asserted in trademark infringement litigation pending between the parties. Stanford Financial Group Company, Stanford Group Company, their entity affiliates, parent and subsidiary companies, including, but not limited to, Stanford Investment Bank and Stanford Trust Company, are not, and have never been, related or affiliated in any way with Stanford University.

Canadian Court Replaces Vantis with US Receiver and Rebukes Antiguan Liquidators for Misconduct - On September 11, 2009, the Superior Court in Montreal, Quebec issued an order recognizing the U.S. Receivership as the appropriate legal insolvency proceedings for Stanford entities including SIB and recognizing Ralph Janvey as the foreign representative for those persons and entities. As part of Mr. Janvey’s recognition and as required by Canadian law, the court appointed a firm with insolvency practitioners licensed in Canada, Ernst & Young, to serve as ancillary receiver in Canada for these entities and to work in coordination with Mr. Janvey.

The Canadian court also revoked the prior recognition of Nigel Hamilton-Smith and Peter Wastell of Vantis PLC (“Vantis”). The prior recognition of Vantis was revoked in part because of various improper acts that the court found to have been undertaken by or on behalf of Vantis including acts taken without prior approval from the court or notifying the Quebec financial regulator.

The judgments recognizing the US Receiver and revoking Vantis’ appointment have now been translated and were filed with the U.S. District Court with a request for judicial notice. You can access the order revoking Vantis’ appointment here and you can access the order recognizing the US receivership here.

Applications by Receiver for Fees and Expenses -- On May 15, 2009 and August 4, 2009, the Receiver filed with the Court applications for approval of payment of fees and expenses to 14 firms that have rendered professional services on behalf of the Estate through May 31, 2009. On June 19, 2009 and September 1, 2009, the Receiver filed replies in response to objections to the fee applications. To view copies of these filings, click here. On September 10, 2009, the Receiver's applications were granted in part and denied in part. To view a copy of the Minute Entry in the Court's records, click here.

Superseding Criminal Indictment in Florida Obstruction Case - On September 10, 2009, a superseding indictment was filed in the Southern District of Florida against Bruce Perraud, a former global security specialist at the Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, office of Stanford Financial Group (SFG), headquartered in Houston, Texas, and against Thomas Raffanello, the former global director of security at SFG’s Ft. Lauderdale office, adding defendant Raffanello and two charges to the original May 2009 indictment of Perraud. Perraud and Raffanello each are charged with one count of conspiracy to obstruct a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) proceeding and to destroy documents in a federal investigation (Count 1: 18 U.S.C. § 371), one count of obstruction of a proceeding before the SEC (Count 2: 18 U.S.C. § 1505), and one count of destruction of records in a federal investigation (Count 3: 18 U.S.C. § 1519). The case is pending before Judge William J. Zloch, United States District Court Judge for the Southern District Florida, 299 East Broward Boulevard, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. To view a copy of the superseding indictment, click here. For further details on this case or any of the Stanford-related cases, please go to www.usdoj.gov/criminal/vns.

Lawsuit Against Financial Advisors -- On August 26, 2009, the Receiver filed a supplemental complaint in his previously filed lawsuit that seeks to recover commissions, front-end loans and other CD-related compensation that Stanford Group Company paid to certain former financial advisors. These amounts were paid to the financial advisors as compensation for soliciting their clients to purchase certificates of deposit from Stanford International Bank, Ltd. As supplemented, the complaint now seeks to recover approximately $134 million from 253 former financial advisors.

The lawsuit alleges that the brokerage services performed by the financial advisors in exchange for the compensation payments were not legitimate and did not confer any benefit on their customers, and therefore that the financial advisors have no rightful ownership interest that could justify their retaining possession of the funds.

The lawsuit seeks recovery of the funds for the benefit of the Receivership Estate on the basis that the amounts were fraudulently transferred, as well as on the relief defendant theory previously asserted. The 253 financial advisors named in the lawsuit each received $50,000 or more in compensation related to CD sales over the two-year period prior to the Receivership.

To view a copy of the supplemental complaint, click here.

Unavailability of SIPC Coverage for SIB CDs -- The Receiver has had discussions with the Securities Investor Protection Corporation to determine whether SIPC coverage is available for Stanford International Bank Ltd. CDs. Unfortunately, no such coverage is available. To view a copy of the August 14, 2009 letter from SIPC to the Receiver explaining why coverage is not available, click here. To view the Receiver's letter to SIPC requesting a statement of its position, click here. To view FAQs on this subject and on related issues, such as why no coverage is available from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and how the Madoff situation differs from Stanford, click here.

Fifth Circuit Grants Receiver's Motions To Extend Asset Freeze During Appeal of Claw Back Decision -- On August 11, 2009, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the Receiver's motions to extend the asset freeze over certain Stanford Group Company and Stanford Trust Company customer accounts that remain frozen. The extension maintains the asset freeze during the Receiver's appeal of the July 31 District Court determination that claw backs for CD principal are not allowed under the law. See the discussion of the District Court's decision set forth below. Final briefing on the Receiver's appeal is due on October 14, 2009, and oral argument has tentatively been scheduled for November 2, 2009. To view a copy of the Fifth Circuit's orders, click here.

Receiver Motion To Extend Asset Freeze During Appeal of Claw Back Decision -- On August 7, 2009, the Receiver filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in order to try to overturn the District Court’s determination that claw backs for CD principal are not allowed under the law. The Receiver also filed a motion to extend, during the time the appeal is being considered, the asset freeze over certain Stanford Group Company and Stanford Trust Company customer accounts that remain frozen. The District Court had determined that the Receiver could pursue claw backs for CD interest payments but not for CD principal amounts that had been previously paid out, as described below. If the appellate court does not extend the freeze, then the frozen accounts must be released effective August 13, 2009, except that accounts owned by Stanford related persons and amounts in investor accounts related to clawback claims for CD interest would continue to be frozen under the District Court’s order. To view a copy of the Receiver's motion, click here.

Receiver Statement Regarding Court Hearing Addressing Clawbacks -- The Court held a hearing at 5:00 pm, on Friday, July 31, 2009 regarding: (1) the Receiver's July 28 motion to establish expedited and summary proceedings for consideration of the Receiver's amended complaint regarding claw backs, (2) the Receiver's related motion to extend the account freeze on certain customer accounts and (3) the SEC's motion to amend the Receiver's Order of Appointment to prohibit the Receiver from pursuing claw backs.

The Court denied the SEC's motion to prohibit the Receiver from pursuing claw back claims. Although the Court also denied the Receiver's motion for an extension of the freeze (except with regard to interest payments that may be held), the Court temporarily stayed (suspended) its previous order vacating the freeze (i.e. mandating the automatic release of all frozen accounts on August 3, 2009) for a ten day period following the entry of an order reflecting his intentions as articulated at the hearing so that the Receiver could appeal the order if he so chose. The freeze with respect to former Stanford financial advisors, certain former Stanford employees and persons indebted to the Stanford entities which was continued in the June 29 Order was not affected by the Court's ruling.

The Court essentially ruled that it would allow claw back claims against investors only for purported interest payments. The Court stated that the law as to the ability to bring claw back claims against innocent investors for principal was arguably unclear but that the appellate court may have a different view as to the proper interpretation of the law in these circumstances. The Court remarked that, if the Fifth Circuit agreed with the Receiver's interpretation of the law, then the pursuit of such claims is necessary in order to meet the Receiver's duty to maximize the assets for distribution to Stanford victims. Accordingly, the Receiver will file an appeal with the Fifth Circuit on an expedited basis regarding the ability to pursue claw back claims for principal.

Activities regarding the pursuit of claw back claims against investors for principal will cease until such time as the Fifth Circuit provides its guidance with regard to whether or not these claims may be pursued through treatment of such investors as relief defendants.

To view the Court's order regarding the account freeze in general, click here.

Motion Regarding Coin and Bullion Claims and Assets -- On July 29, 2009, the Receiver and the Examiner filed a joint motion seeking authority for the Receiver to take certain actions regarding coin and bullion claims and assets. The motion identifies six different categories of coin and bullion claims and assets, and requests authority to address each category. The proposed actions to be taken depend on the category of assets, as described in the motion. To view a copy of the motion, click here.

Receiver Files Amended Complaint To Recover $925 Million of CD Related Funds -- On July 28, 2009, the Receiver filed papers with the Court seeking the return to the Receivership Estate of approximately $925 million of funds related to Stanford International Bank Ltd. certificates of deposit. The Receiver’s goal in pursuing these claims is to achieve equity for all investors by maximizing the assets of the Estate.

The $925 million consists of (1) approximately $40 million of fees, commissions and loans related to CDs from 66 former Stanford financial advisors, (2) approximately $373 million of purported CD redemption or interest payments from more than 500 SIB account holders who have Stanford Group Company or Stanford Trust Company accounts that are frozen under the Court's February 2009 order (these frozen accounts contain approximately $300 million of assets that would be available to satisfy the claims against these account holders), (3) approximately $18 million of such funds from 40 account holders who have signed agreements with the Receiver regarding release of their accounts and have wired funds into the Receiver's escrow account and (4) approximately $494 million from the 49 other SIB account holders that received the largest amounts of purported CD redemption or interest proceeds after January 1, 2008 that are not covered by one of the categories above (these defendants do not have frozen accounts at Stanford Group Company or Stanford Trust Company). The 66 former financial advisors and certain of the other relief defendants were named as defendants in prior complaints, which are superseded by the amended complaint filed July 28.

The persons listed in the amended complaint are a very small percentage of the more than 20,000 investors who have thus far received little or nothing from their investment in SIB CDs. Upon recovery, these funds will be shared by all CD investors, including those from whom the funds are recovered.

Many people say they do not understand why the Receiver would seek to recover funds from persons who may have been victims themselves of the Stanford fraud. As explained in the filings, the Receiver believes the redemption, interest and other payments were made with money stolen by the Stanford entities from other CD holders and therefore should be equitably distributed among all the victims.

CD customers who received redemptions or interest payments may believe the proceeds were a return of an investment placed with what they thought was a legitimate bank, Stanford International Bank Ltd. In reality, the money that CD customers received was not their money, was not a return of their investment, and was not generated by any of SIB’s other business ventures. The funds used to pay purported CD interest and redemptions were simply money that was stolen from the thousands of CD holders who were deceived into purchasing CDs and who, by chance, or as the result of sales tactics by brokers, had not withdrawn funds from SIB as of the date the Receivership was put in place.

If recovered in full, the $925 million in the aggregate would represent the Estate’s largest single asset, significantly greater in size than the amount likely to be recovered from all other assets of the Estate combined, based on information currently available to the Receiver. The Receiver believes the Court’s order requires the claims to be pursued in order to maximize assets available for distribution to all victims of the fraud.

The Receiver intends to evaluate and pursue other similar claims based on a cost/benefit analysis, in which the costs to the Estate of pursuing a claim are compared to the benefits to be achieved (considering both the likelihood of recovery and the amount to be recovered if successful).

As detailed in the filings, the claims for the return of funds are fully supported by case law and have been upheld under the established legal principle of “equality is equity."

To view the amended complaint, click here.

In many cases, the funds sought to be recovered are held in customer accounts that are subject to the current account freeze; in other cases, the funds are not held in frozen accounts. The Receiver also filed related papers with the Court seeking to extend the account freeze on all currently frozen accounts that are the subject of the amended complaint until the Court determines whether the funds should be returned to the Estate. The account freeze would otherwise expire on August 3, 2009. To view the Receiver's motion to extend the account freeze on these accounts, click here.

To view the Receiver's motion seeking expedited and summary consideration of the issues involved in the filings, click here.

Notice of the Status of United States v. Robert Allen Stanford et al. and United States v. James M. Davis -- At the request of the Department of Justice and as a courtesy to investors, we have added a link on our website to the Department of Justice’s Victim Witness website so that you can receive case updates and information about future court proceedings in United States v. Robert Allen Stanford et al. and  United States v. James M. Davis, including the dates of public court proceedings that either have or will occur in the near future. Please access the link or visit the Department of Justice's website at www.usdoj.gov/criminal/vns to obtain details about the upcoming August 6, 2009 change of plea hearing in United States v. James M. Davis, which will be held in Courtroom  8A before Judge David Hittner.

If you have any views about the upcoming plea and/or wish to appear and be heard at the plea hearing, you must submit your views to the prosecutors handling this investigation, by providing comments to Pam Washington at 1-888-549-3945 or via email at victimassistance.fraud@usdoj.gov, no later than Friday, July 31, 2009.

Receiver Report on Status of Frozen Accounts -- The latest report by the Receiver on the status of the account freeze and release process regarding Stanford Group Company and Stanford Trust Company accounts, dated as of July 8, 2009, reflects the following:

  • An estimated 20,597 customers of Stanford Group Company and Stanford Trust Company (Louisiana) have had their accounts at Pershing, J.P. Morgan or SEI released from the Court-ordered freeze;
  • 225 customers of Stanford Group Company and Stanford Trust Company have brokerage or other accounts that remain subject to the account freeze because the owners are former senior management of the Stanford companies, former financial advisors who appear to owe amounts to the Estate or customers who have not taken any action to repay an outstanding loan or debit balance owed to the Estate;
  • An additional 481 customers of Stanford Group Company have brokerage accounts at Pershing or JP Morgan that remain subject to the account freeze because they contain or appear to contain CD proceeds;
  • 232 of the 481 Stanford Group Company customers noted above have submitted applications for review and possible release and the resolution of those applications is in progress;
  • 95 customers of Stanford Trust Company have accounts at SEI that remain subject to the account freeze because they contain or appear to contain CD proceeds;
  • $17.9 million in CD proceeds is being held by the Receiver in escrow pursuant to stipulations with account holders; and
  • An estimated $251 million of the funds that remain frozen at Pershing, JP Morgan and SEI, plus an additional amount not yet determined, are proceeds related to CDs which the Receiver believes are funds that should be part of the Receivership Estate.

To see a copy of the full report, click here.

For further information about procedures available to transfer accounts that have been released from the freeze and procedures that apply to review of accounts that remain frozen, please see “Customer Account Review and Release Information” below.

U.K. Court Orders Regarding Estate Assets in the U.K. -- On July 3, 2009, a trial court in the United Kingdom issued a decision that recognized the Antiguan Liquidators as “foreign representatives” in the U.K. for Stanford International Bank Limited, and recognized the Antiguan liquidation proceeding for SIB as the “foreign main proceeding” for SIB, at least so far as UK law goes. In the same decision, the court also recognized, as a matter of U.K. law, the Receiver as the receiver for the other defendants in the U.S. receivership. If the decision is not reversed on appeal, and ignoring any asset freezes, the decision would give the Antiguan Liquidators powers over assets of SIB that are located in the United Kingdom.

However, all assets of SIB located in the United Kingdom have been frozen under two separate orders issued by U.K. courts. As a result, the cash of SIB in the United Kingdom is required to remain in place unless and until a UK court lifts or modifies the freeze, or the requesting party agrees to a lifting or modification of the freeze. One of these was issued at the request of the SEC, and the other at the request of the U.K. Serious Fraud Office (which in turn acted at the request of the U.S. Department of Justice). The order issued at the request of the UK Serious Fraud Office was issued in April 2009, but was not publicly disclosed until after the criminal indictments of Allen Stanford and others were returned in June 2009.

To the extent the U.K. decision recognizes the Antiguan Liquidators and the Antiguan liquidation proceeding as superior to the Receiver and the U.S. receivership, the Receiver believes it is wrongly decided and should be reversed. The Receiver will appeal the decision so it can be reviewed by a higher court.

Court Order Regarding Account Freeze -- On June 29, 2009, the Court issued an order that sets a deadline of August 3, 2009 for the Receiver to complete his review of frozen customer brokerage accounts at Stanford Group Company and frozen accounts at Stanford Trust Company. During that time, the Receiver is to assess whether to assert “claw back” claims against individual investors and to assert any such claims in a proceeding ancillary to the Receivership case, together with claims for prejudgment attachment. Any Stanford Group Company and Stanford Trust Company accounts as to which no such claim has been asserted by noon on August 3, 2009 will be unfrozen and released. With respect to Stanford Group Company and Stanford Trust Company accounts as to which any such claim is filed by the Receiver before that time, the Receiver will request the Court to continue the freeze until the claim is resolved.

The Order states that it does not affect accounts frozen because the owners are former senior management of Stanford companies, former financial advisors who appear to owe amounts to the Estate, or customers who have not taken any action to repay an outstanding loan or debit balance owed to the Estate.

Additional information about the impact of the Court’s order on the ongoing account review process for Stanford Group Company accounts will be posted on this website as it is developed by the Receiver.

To view a copy of the order, click here.

Filing of Additional Clawback Claims - The Receiver has filed additional "clawback" claims relating to more than $20 million of CD related proceeds. To view a statement regarding these claims, click here.

Federal Criminal Indictments Against Allen Stanford and Others - On June 19, 2009, a federal criminal indictment was unsealed that charges Allen Stanford and others of fraud, obstruction and other crimes related to the Stanford Financial companies. Also charged in the indictment were Laura Pendergest-Holt, the former chief investment officer of Stanford Financial, Gilberto Lopez, the former chief accounting officer, Mark Kurht, the former global controller, and Leroy King, the former administrator and CEO of Antigua's Financial Services Regulatory Commission. A separate federal criminal information was unsealed charging James Davis, the former chief financial officer of Stanford Financial, with fraud and conspiracy. A separate federal criminal indictment was unsealed that charges Bruce Perraud, a former Stanford Financial security specialist, with destruction of records related to a federal investigation. To view copies of the indictments and the information, click here.

SEC Files Second Amended Complaint in Civil Case - On June 19, 2009, the SEC filed a Second Amended Complaint in its civil lawsuit against the Defendants. The amended complaint adds allegations that Mark Kurht and Gilbert Lopez, former accounting officers of Stanford Financial, and Leroy King, the former administrator and CEO of Antigua's Financial Services Regulatory Commission, aided and abetted the alleged fraud. To view a copy of the amended complaint, click here.

Allen Stanford Motion to Disqualify Baker Botts – On June 16, 2009, Allen Stanford filed a Motion to Disqualify Baker Botts L.L.P. as lead counsel to the Receiver based on allegations of a conflict of interest arising out of the purported prior representation of Mr. Stanford by Baker Botts L.L.P. in organizing Guardian International Bank or Stanford International Bank. Mr. Stanford based his claim on the contents of a Baker Botts file that the firm produced to Mr. Stanford's lawyers in response to a request from James Stanford (Allen Stanford’s father), who is a former client of the firm. Allen Stanford also filed a related Emergency Motion to Stay Receivership Pending Defendants' Motion to Disqualify Baker Botts L.L.P., to which the Receiver will be responding shortly.

On June 30, 2009, the Receiver filed a response to the motion to disqualify. The response states that Baker Botts’ records do not show that Allen Stanford was ever a client of the firm, nor do they show that the firm formed, established or approved Stanford International Bank or its structure. What Baker Botts did do, between October 1985 and February 1986, was to perform $850 worth of legal services for James Stanford. The Baker Botts associate who did the work left the firm in 1987. The prior work bore no relationship to the work the firm is now engaged in on behalf of the Receiver, and no conflict of interest exists.

The Receiver's response was filed under seal at the request of Allen Stanford’s lawyers and because James Stanford may assert that the contents of the file are subject to the attorney client privilege. The Receiver also delivered a copy of the law firm's file, together with copies of the time records that the firm has of the matter, to the Court for in camera inspection.

The Receiver fully expects that both motions will be denied.

In the meantime, the Receivership will continue to work to preserve assets, liquidate assets into cash for future distribution, and prepare and categorize claims for development of a distribution plan for the Court's consideration.

Sale of Building by Swiss Entity - Questions have been raised in the press recently, apparently quoting allegations by Allen Stanford, regarding the sale by Stanford Group Suisse AG ("Stanford AG") of its office building in Zurich. The following describes the sale process and corrects inaccuracies in some press reports. Stanford AG was engaged in the investment management business on behalf of customers. After the institution of the Receivership, Stanford AG faced a severe liquidity crisis, as its customers withdrew the assets the entity had been managing. The withdrawals deprived the entity of its only significant source of revenue. As a result, Stanford AG was behind in payments to creditors and employees, creating a substantial risk it would be placed imminently into a forced liquidation under Swiss law.

To address the liquidity issue, the board and management of Stanford AG made an urgent request to the Receiver for a substantial cash infusion, but the Receiver concluded that that was not a good use of Estate funds. The board and management then decided to seek a buyer for the Zurich office building, Stanford AG’s only significant asset. After receiving several offers, they chose the highest offer, for 24 million Swiss francs (approximately $22 million). In addition to being the highest offer, that offer was also from a bidder who could act quickly and who was willing to invest 5 million Swiss francs in Stanford AG upon signing the purchase agreement, which would allow Stanford AG to avoid a forced liquidation. Avoiding a forced liquidation was desirable because a sale of the building in liquidation, where the principal focus would simply be to satisfy creditors, likely would have generated a lower sales price. The sales price received by Stanford AG exceeded the appraised value under both a recent appraisal and a year-old appraisal.

The sale transaction was initiated, authorized and implemented by the directors and management of Stanford AG. Representatives of the Receiver were consulted regarding the transaction, and they reviewed and commented on the related documents and on the sale process. Approval of the sale by the Dallas Federal Court was not necessary, because Stanford AG, not the Receiver, controlled the transaction. In light of Swiss legal requirements and other reasons, the Receiver concluded it was not possible in the short time available for the Receiver to take control of the board of directors of Stanford AG. in a timely enough fashion in order to avoid liquidation. Further, the Receiver concluded that the actions taken by the board and management were reasonable and proper and that such actions maximized the return to the estate.

After the agreement was signed, Stanford AG entered a voluntary, and orderly, liquidation to wind up its affairs. The Estate is entitled to receive the net proceeds remaining after liquidation of assets and satisfaction of claims of creditors as required by Swiss law.

Status of Stanford International Bank, Ltd. CDs - The Receiver has continued to receive many inquiries from investors who purchased certificates of deposit ("CDs") issued by Stanford International Bank, Ltd. ("SIB"). Unfortunately, as the Receiver has said since early in the case, the news for CD investors is not good. Both the Receiver and the liquidators appointed by the Antiguan court have concluded that SIB does not have the assets required to redeem any significant portion of the CDs it sold, nor to pay interest on those CDs. Investors in CDs will likely recover only a fraction of the amounts invested in those CDs, and the Receiver cannot predict what that recovery might be nor when investors might receive that recovery.

A number of CD investors have contacted the Receiver to ask when their CDs will be "released." Many of these investors appear to believe that the reason they cannot access their money is that the Receiver has frozen their CD accounts. Those requests have often been accompanied by accounts of the hardships that investors are suffering because they cannot access the funds they paid to purchase CDs. The Receiver recognizes that investors are suffering through hardships because of their investment in SIB CDs.

However, in the case of CDs, there is no account to “release.” Put simply, the problem is that the assets available to SIB are not sufficient to pay any significant portion of the amount owed on the outstanding CDs.

Unlike funds put into brokerage accounts, the funds that were transferred by investors to SIB to purchase CDs were not held, and are not held, in segregated accounts for the individual investors. Instead, the CDs were simply debt obligations on the part of SIB (to pay interest and, upon redemption, principal) to the CD holders. SIB cannot meet those obligations. It appears that funds paid to purchase CDs were used by SIB and other Stanford entities to buy other assets and/or for other purposes. The SEC has alleged that CDs were sold in a Ponzi scheme through which the proceeds of newer CD sales were used to make payments on older CDs or diverted to other uses unrelated to the CDs.

The Receiver is working to identify and secure assets that can be applied to the claims of CD holders and other creditors. That process will likely take a considerable period of time, and is unlikely to result in anything approaching a complete recovery for CD holders.

For more information about SIB CDs, click here.

Response to Bukrinsky Motion Regarding Bankruptcy – On June 1, 2009, the Receiver filed a response in opposition to a motion by Samuel Bukrinsky and other CD holders requesting the Court to permit them to file an involuntary bankruptcy petition against SIB or any of the other Defendants. The Receiver believes that a bankruptcy proceeding at this time would be counterproductive and not in the best interests of Stanford investors and creditors.

The following are among the reasons a bankruptcy at this time would be an inferior vehicle for addressing the many complex issues involved in untangling the massive fraud that lies at the heart of this case:

  • Receivership generally is more efficient and cost-effective than bankruptcy because, among other things, receiverships are not subject to the bankruptcy practice of the creation of multiple creditor committees, each with its own counsel and other professionals charging fees to the estate.
  • The particular circumstances of this Receivership would add even more costs to a bankruptcy filed at this time. Bankruptcy now would result in substantial transition costs associated with the turnover of assets and information from the Receiver to a potential superseding trustee.
  • The Receivership’s cost and efficiency advantages over bankruptcy do not sacrifice the due process rights of investors and other creditors. For example, they will be given notice of, with an opportunity to object to, the distribution plan that the Receiver will ultimately propose.
  • Receivership provides needed flexibility in formulating a plan of distribution that is fair and equitable for all stakeholders. Unlike bankruptcy, receivers can take into account relative fault within a class of creditors, and fashion an equitable plan of distribution that does not treat all creditors within a class identically if they are not deserving of equal treatment.
  • Additionally, the Bankruptcy Code’s rigidity can have negative consequences for investors, including CD holders. Because their claims are related to the sale or purchase of a security, the Bankruptcy Code mandates that their claims be subordinated to those of other creditors. This likely would result in a much lower recovery for SIB CD investors in bankruptcy than they can achieve in a distribution by the Receiver outside of bankruptcy.

To view a copy of the response filed by the Receiver, click here.

Court Agrees to Consider Chapter 15 Request - On May 15, 2009, the Court agreed to consider whether the U.S. courts should recognize, under Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the proceedings for the liquidation of Stanford International Bank, Ltd. (“SIB”) that are pending in the Antiguan courts. The Court’s May 15 ruling was requested by Messrs. Nigel Hamilton-Smith and Peter Wastell, who were recently appointed by the Antiguan court to serve as liquidators in that proceeding (the “Antiguan Liquidators”).

The May 15 ruling neither accepted nor rejected the Antiguan Liquidators’ request for recognition under Chapter 15; it provided only that the request would be considered and that the District Court would consider it instead of a U.S. bankruptcy court. The Amended Receivership Order dated March 12, 2009 had precluded anyone other than the Receiver from making a filing under any provision of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code covering SIB or any other Defendant without approval of the Court.

Chapter 15 is a provision in the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, added in 2005, that applies to bankruptcy or other insolvency proceedings in multiple countries. It provides for U.S. court recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings under certain circumstances, in order to promote cooperation among countries, so long as neither the recognition nor the proceeding is manifestly contrary to U.S. public policy.

The May 15 ruling directed the Antiguan Liquidators, the Receiver and the other parties to the Receivership case to confer regarding what process the Court should follow in considering the Antiguan Liquidators’ request for recognition of the Antiguan proceeding under Chapter 15. All are to advise the Court of their positions regarding that process by May 29, 2009. The Court will then decide when and how to consider the request for recognition.

When the Court addresses the Antiguan Liquidators’ request for recognition under Chapter 15, it will determine first whether to recognize the Antiguan Liquidators as “foreign representatives.” If it does so, it will then determine whether the Antiguan proceeding is a “foreign main proceeding” or a “foreign non-main proceeding.” The Court’s decisions on these issues will then determine — for purposes of U.S. law — which of the two proceedings, the U.S. Receivership proceeding or the Antiguan liquidation proceeding, will be considered the primary proceeding regarding SIB and how the two proceedings will relate to one another.

The Antiguan legal system has no method for recognition of insolvency proceedings in other countries (i.e., no counterpart to the U.S. Chapter 15), and to date the Antiguan courts have refused to recognize the validity of the U.S. Receivership Order.

A detailed statement of the Receiver’s position on the Antiguan Liquidators’ request for recognition will be set forth in papers to be filed with the Court at the appropriate time.

To view the Court’s May 15, 2009 order, click here.

Account Management Fees - For information on the status of account management fees regarding certain customer accounts at Stanford Group Company (Pershing LLC), Stanford Capital Management (Pershing LLC) and Stanford Trust Company, click here.

Customer Account Review and Release Information – Important information about the status of released customer accounts and a June 29, 2009 Court order regarding the account freeze is set forth above under "Court Order Regarding Account Freeze" and "Receiver Report on Status of Frozen Accounts". The paragraphs below describe procedures available to transfer accounts that have been released from the freeze and procedures that apply to review of accounts that remain frozen.

  • Transfer of Released Stanford Group Company Accounts. Under the Court’s March 5 and March 12, 2009 orders, as requested by the Receiver, 28,452 Stanford Group Company customer brokerage accounts (which had aggregate assets of approximately $4.6 billion) became eligible for transfer to a new firm. The transfer process now has been initiated by the customer and completed with respect to the large majority of these accounts, but a significant number have not yet been transferred due to inaction by the customer.

    Holders of the remaining such released accounts may transfer their accounts at any time, and they are encouraged to do so promptly. For information regarding the applicable transfer procedures, click here. Any of these accounts that are not transferred to a new firm by the customer may be transferred in the near future by the Receiver in bulk to a new firm selected by the Receiver in order to reduce Estate expenses.

  • Account Review Process for Stanford Group Company Accounts That Remain Frozen. On April 6, 2009, the Receiver established a process, which had been approved by an order of the Court, addressing the 3,988 Stanford Group Company customer brokerage accounts that remained frozen. These accounts, which had aggregate assets of approximately $1.7 billion, were made eligible for an account review process that permits holders of the accounts to provide information that may lead to the release of their accounts. Most of these accounts remained frozen because data available to the Receiver indicated that the accounts may be associated with proceeds of the allegedly fraudulent products or activities; others remained frozen because they are owned by certain Stanford related persons; and others remained frozen because the accounts were associated with outstanding non-purpose loans or other customer debit balances.

    The Receiver, in consultation with the Examiner, has implemented three procedures to expedite the review and release of customer accounts that have been determined to hold proceeds related to SIB CDs:

    • First, under a Court order issued May 22, 2009 at the request of the Receiver and the Examiner, the Receiver is able to release a portion of the assets in a customer's account without Court approval, if the Receiver and the customer agree. This is being done in situations where a portion of the account assets would continue to be held in an amount that would be sufficient to satisfy certain claims that may be brought by the Receiver to recover proceeds relating to SIB CDs. The Receiver has contacted or is in the process of contacting the relevant customers.

    • Second, as further provided in the Court's May 22 order, the Receiver is also releasing additional accounts where the Receiver determines in his sole discretion that the account holder has received only de minimis proceeds from SIB CDs.

    • Third, with respect to many of the accounts that continue to be held because the customer received proceeds related to SIB CDs, a single customer owns multiple such accounts. If the amount sufficient to satisfy the potential claims against the customer's account is contained in fewer than all of a customer's accounts, the Receiver will release the other accounts to the customer. In some cases this will require consultation with the customer to assure that the account that remains frozen contains sufficient cash, rather than securities whose value may vary, to cover the potential claims. This may require the liquidation of securities, which will be at the discretion of the customer. If desired, the customer may also provide other funds to avoid liquidation of holdings. The Receiver is in the process of contacting the relevant customers. Releases of this type do not require Court approval.

    To date, the Receiver has given priority in the review process to accounts that are owned by persons who are not Stanford related and whose owners certified in their review applications that they had not received proceeds of redemption of Stanford International Bank Ltd. certificates of deposit, as well as to those with demonstrated medical or financial emergencies. Upon completion of the review of an account, the Receiver notifies the account owner of the result of the review. Released accounts either have been transferred or are eligible to be transferred by the owner to a new firm as described under “Transfer of Released Stanford Group Company Accounts” above.

    For information about how to request that a frozen Stanford Group Company brokerage account be released, click here.

  • Stanford Group Company Accounts with Outstanding Loans or Debit Balances. A number of Stanford Group Company customer accounts remain frozen solely because the accounts have outstanding non-purpose loans or other customer debit balances. The owners of these accounts may obtain release and transfer of the net assets in their accounts at any time by paying off the debit balances. For information about how to pay off such an account balance and obtain release of the accounts, click here (FAQ 15).

  • Stanford Trust Company Accounts -- On May 27, 2009, the Court issued an order granting the Receiver’s request to, among other things, release Stanford Trust Company accounts where the Receiver determines in his sole discretion that the accountholder has received only a de minimis amount of proceeds from SIB CDs. On June 5, 2009, pursuant to the May 27 order, the Receiver released 1,142 Stanford Trust Company accounts. These 1,142 accounts are in addition to the 174 Stanford Trust Company accounts previously released under the Court’s order issued on April 23, 2009. Any of these released accounts that have not yet been transferred by the customer to a new financial institution may be transferred by the customer to a new institution at any time.

    The remaining Stanford Trust Company accounts that continue to be frozen hold approximately $35 milliion in proceeds related to SIB CDs. Under the May 27 order, the Receiver may now release a portion of the assets in these 122 customer accounts without Court approval, if the Receiver and the customer agree on certain actions. This will be done in situations where a portion of the account assets (or assets in a related account) would continue to be held in an amount that would be sufficient to satisfy certain claims that may be brought by the Receiver to recover proceeds relating to SIB CDs. The Receiver has contacted or is in the process of contacting the relevant Stanford Trust Company customers.

    For information on how to transfer a Stanford Trust Company account that has been released, click here to view the FAQs regarding Procedures for Transfer of Certain Stanford Trust Company Accounts. (Click here to view the April 23 order and here to view the May 27 order.)

Report of the Receiver - On April 23, 2009, the Receiver filed a report with the Court that discusses numerous topics regarding the Estate and related proceedings, including activities, findings, accomplishments and conclusions to date. (Click here to view a copy of the report.)

Redirection of Client Online Account Access - As of April 24, 2009, all former Stanford Financial Group websites that were in operation prior to the commencement of the Receivership were shut down and redirected to this website. Clients with online account access can still access their accounts online by clicking here.

Court Issues Order Denying Interventions - On April 20, 2009, the Court issued an order denying motions filed by certain account holders and others to intervene in the case. In so doing, the Court found that the freeze of customer accounts at the outset of the Receivership "properly applied to the movants' accounts." The Court also found that the SEC and the Receiver adequately represent the interests of the movants in the pending lawsuit and that, in any event, the Court has appointed "an examiner to present the collective interests of Stanford investors to the Court." The Court further referenced the account review process established by the Receiver and held that movants could not show that they have an inability to protect their interests. (Click here to view the order.)

Court Issues Order Appointing Examiner - Also on April 20, 2009, the Court issued an order appointing John J. Little, of the Dallas, Texas law firm of Little Pedersen Fankhauser LLP, as Examiner in the case. The order directs the Examiner to convey to the Court such information as the Examiner, in his sole discretion, shall determine would be helpful to the Court in considering the interests of the investors in any financial products, accounts, vehicles or ventures sponsored, promoted or sold by any of the Defendants. The order also sets forth the Examiner's authority. The Receiver looks forward to working with the Examiner to maximize the recovery of assets for the benefit of Stanford claimants, world-wide. (Click here to view the order.)


General Information

On February 16, 2009, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, signed an order appointing a Receiver for all the assets and records (the “Receivership Estate”) of Stanford International Bank, Ltd., Stanford Group Company, Stanford Capital Management, LLC, R. Allen Stanford, James M. Davis and Laura Pendergest-Holt ("Defendants") and of all entities they own or control. The February 16 order, as amended March 12, 2009 (as so amended, the "Amended Receivership Order"), directs the Receiver to, among other things, take control and possession of and to operate the Receivership Estate, and to perform all acts necessary to conserve, hold, manage and preserve the value of the Receivership Estate. In addition, the Amended Receivership Order restrains and enjoins, without prior approval of the Court, creditors and all other persons from the following:

  • any act to obtain possession of the Receivership Estate assets;
  • any act to create, perfect, or enforce any lien against the property of the Receiver, or the Receivership Estate;
  • any act to collect, assess, or recover a claim against the Receiver or that would attach to or encumber the Receivership Estate;
  • the set off of any debt owed by the Receivership Estate or secured by the Receivership Estate assets based on any claim against the Receiver or the Receivership Estate; and
  • the filing of any case, complaint, petition, or motion under the Bankruptcy Code (including, without limitation, the filing of an involuntary bankruptcy petition under chapter 7 or chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, or a petition for recognition of foreign proceeding under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code).

(Click here to view the Amended Receivership Order.)

On February 16, 2009, the Court also signed a Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) that temporarily enjoined the Defendants from committing certain violations of law. The order containing the TRO also contains an Order Freezing Assets and Order Requiring Preservation of Documents ("Freeze Order"). The Freeze Order contains certain provisions that continue in full force and effect until further order by the Court, including, among other things:

  • provisions that freeze the assets of the Receivership Estate and prohibit the destruction of records,
  • a provision that enjoins any financial or depository entities that hold one or more accounts in the name, on behalf or for the benefit of the Defendants or subsequently added relief defendants from engaging in any transaction in securities or any disbursement of funds or securities pending further instructions of the Receiver, and
  • a provision that enjoins all other entities and individuals from disbursing any funds, securities or other property obtained from the Defendants or subsequently added relief defendants without adequate consideration.

On March 2 and March 12, 2009, the Court entered preliminary injunctions against the Defendants to substantially the same effect as the TRO and the Freeze Order. (Click here to view the preliminary injunctions.)

The Amended Receivership Order, the TRO, the Freeze Order and the preliminary injunctions were issued in connection with a lawsuit brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission against the Defendants. (Click here to view the amended complaint filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 27, 2009.)

(Click here to view the website of the Securities and Exchange Commission.)

Additional information will be posted on this website as available.

To open the links above you will need Adobe Reader.