Ex-UBS trader accused of spoofing argues against US Govt intervention and stay of his case
Whereas the US Government wants the CFTC action against Andre Flotron to be stayed until the criminal action has concluded, the defendant says this will unfairly prejudice him.
The United States Government and Andre Flotron, a former precious metals trader of UBS AG (SWX:UBSN), have clashed over whether the civil action against the trader should be stayed.
On February 12, 2018, the Government filed a motion to intervene and stay the civil action, brought by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), until the criminal action has concluded. Late last week, however, Flotron filed his objections to the Government’s motion.
In his filings with the Connecticut District Court, Flotron argues that a stay of a civil case pending resolution of a related criminal action is an “extraordinary remedy.” He also notes that a stay of the civil action would significantly and unfairly prejudice him.
The Government claims that a stay is necessary “to preclude Flotron from impermissibly taking advantage of the civil discovery process to circumvent the limitations on criminal discovery that protect the integrity of criminal prosecutions.” The defendant, however, fails to understand what is “impermissible” about him obtaining discovery in connection with what he sees as an indisputably serious civil action against him.
Defendant Andre Flotron is a citizen and resident of Switzerland. He was arrested in September 2017, while visiting his girlfriend in the United States, based on a federal criminal complaint that issued from the District of Connecticut. The criminal complaint alleged defendant’s violation of federal criminal laws including conspiracy, wire fraud, commodities fraud, and “spoofing” between July 2008 and November 2013. The charges stemmed from allegedly fraudulent or manipulative practices by defendant while he was employed as a precious metals trader for UBS AG.
In October 2017, Flotron was released on a $4 million bond and strict conditions of home confinement with GPS monitoring at a residence of a custodian in New Jersey.
On January 30, 2018, the US Government secured the return of a seven-count superseding indictment. It filed a motion to dismiss without prejudice the remaining conspiracy count so that the Government may re-indict defendant on this charge along with substantive charges in the Northern District of Illinois.
Earlier this month, Judge Jeffrey Alker Meyer of the Connecticut District Court blasted the Government’s requests to allow the transfer of the case to Illinois. The Judge concluded that a speedy trial should proceed in Connecticut on the schedule previously agreed to by the Government. In explaining his decision, the Judge said it would be clearly contrary to the manifest public interest to allow the Government to break its agreement to proceed to trial in April so that it may start the prosecution all over again on a blank slate with new charges in the Northern District of Illinois.
What is important is how this development in the criminal case will affect the civil case brought by the CFTC and whether Flotron’s arguments will gather weight because of Judge Meyer’s opinion.
Mr Flotron is clearly interested in timely and speedy proceedings. The Government, however, has not yet indicated whether it intends to pursue further criminal charges against the ex-UBS trader in the Northern District of Illinois. The CFTC is also silent about whether it supports the US Government’s request.
The civil case against Mr Flotron is captioned Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Flotron (3:18-cv-00158).
