[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 119 (Friday, June 20, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37034-37035]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-15709]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94-409, that the Securities and 
Exchange Commission will hold the following meetings during the week of 
June 23, 2003:

A closed meeting will be held on Tuesday, June 24, 2003, at 2 p.m., and 
an open meeting will be held on Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 10 a.m. in 
Room 1C30, the William O. Douglas Room.

    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the 
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. 
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters may also be 
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(5), (7), (9)(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(5), 
(7), (9)(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at 
the closed meeting.
    The subject matter of the closed meeting scheduled for Tuesday, 
June 24, 2003, will be:

Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings of an 
enforcement nature;
Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Formal orders of investigation; and
Opinions.

    The subject matter of the open meeting scheduled for Wednesday, 
June 25, 2003, will be:
    1. The Commission will hear oral argument on an appeal by Terence 
Michael Coxon, Alan Michael Sergy, and World Money Managers (``WMM''), 
a registered investment adviser, from the decision of an administrative 
law judge. Coxon is a general partner of WMM, and Sergy was formerly a 
paid consultant to WMM.
    The law judge found that:
    a. Respondents willfully violated section 17(a) of the Securities 
Act of 1933, section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and 
Exchange Act rule 10b-5;
    b. Coxon and Sergy willfully violated section 34(b) of the 
Investment Company Act;
    c. WMM willfully violated section 206(2) of the Investment Advisers 
Act of 1940 and that Coxon and Sergy willfully aided, abetted, and were 
causes of that violation; and
    d. Respondents willfully aided and abetted and were causes of 
violations by the Permanent Portfolio Family of Funds, Inc. of 
Investment Company Act of 1940 sections 17(d), 12(b), 13(a)(3), and 
10(b), and IC Act rules 17d-1 and 12b-1.
    The law judge suspended WMM as an investment adviser for three 
months and assessed a $100,000 civil money penalty; suspended Coxon and 
Sergy from association with an investment adviser or investment company 
for three months and assessed each of them a $20,000 civil money 
penalty; ordered respondents to cease and desist; and assessed 
$1,608,018 in disgorgement, plus prejudgment interest.
    Among the issues likely to be argued are:
    a. Whether respondents committed, aided and abetted, or were causes 
of the alleged violations; and
    b. If so, whether sanctions should be imposed in the public 
interest.
    2. The Commission will hear oral argument on appeals by Fundamental 
Portfolio Advisers, Inc. (``FPA''), Lance M. Brofman, and Fundamental 
Service Corporation (``FSC''), from the decision of an administrative 
law judge. FPA, a registered investment adviser, was the investment 
adviser to The Fundamental U.S. Government Strategic Income Fund (``the 
Fund''). Brofman was formerly the chief portfolio manager for the Fund. 
FSC, a registered broker-dealer affiliated with FPA, distributed shares 
of the Fund.
    The law judge found that FPA violated section 17(a) of the 
Securities Act of 1933, section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 
1934 and Exchange Act rule 10b-5 thereunder. The law judge also found 
that FPA violated section 34(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, 
and sections 206(1) and (2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. 
Additionally, the law judge found that Brofman ``aided and abetted and 
caused'' FPA's violations. Finally, the law judge found that FSC 
violated section 17(a) of the Securities Act, section 10(b) of the 
Exchange Act and rules 10b-3, and 10b-

[[Page 37035]]

5 thereunder, and section 15(c)(1) of the Exchange Act and rule 15c1-2 
thereunder.
    The law judge revoked FPA's investment adviser registration and 
ordered that FPA pay a civil monetary penalty of $500,000; revoked 
FSC's broker-dealer registration and ordered that FSC pay a civil 
monetary penalty of $500,000; and barred Brofman from association with 
any broker, dealer, investment adviser, or investment company and 
ordered him to pay a civil monetary penalty of $250,000. The law judge 
also ordered that Respondents cease and desist from committing or 
causing any violation or future violation of the provisions they were 
found to have violated.
    Among the issues likely to be argued are:
    a. Whether FPA made material misrepresentations and omissions in 
connection with the offer and sale of Fund shares;
    b. Whether FPA failed to disclose to the Fund's Board of Directors 
its soft dollar arrangements;
    c. Whether Brofman aided and abetted and was a cause of FPA's 
violations; and
    d. Whether FSC disseminated materially misleading materials in 
connection with the sale of Fund shares.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted, or postponed, 
please contact: the Office of the Secretary at (202) 942-7070.

    Dated: June 17, 2003.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 03-15709 Filed 6-17-03; 4:52 pm]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P