UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against Jonah Engler a/k/a Jonah Engler-Silberman (“Engler” or “Respondent”). The Commission finds that from October 2013 until June 30, 2015, Engler, age 40, controlled Global Arena Capital Corp. (“Global”). Engler was officially associated with Global as a registered representative from October 2013 to April 16, 2015, but he continued to control Global from April 17, 2015 through at least June 4, 2015. On September 1, 2021, a judgment was entered by consent against Engler, permanently enjoining him from future violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, in a civil action entitled Securities and Exchange Commission v. Engler, et al., Civil Action Number 20 Civ. 1625, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The Commission’s complaint alleged that, from April 1, 2015 through June 4, 2015, Engler knowingly or recklessly directed an unlawful, unauthorized trading scheme carried out by two registered representatives with the knowing assistance of a principal of Global, that resulted in the execution of approximately 4,500 unauthorized trades in approximately 360 customer accounts. The Commission’s complaint further alleged that, of the $2.4 million in unlawful commissions generated from the unauthorized trading, Engler and companies he controlled received at least $1.1 million in ill-gotten gains.

Order

Bar (Permanent)

association with a broker, dealer, investment adviser, municipal securities dealer, municipal advisor, transfer agent, or NRSRO

Indefinite

9/24/2021

participating in any offering of a penny stock

Indefinite

9/24/2021

FINRA

Respondent Engler failed to comply with an arbitration award or settlement agreement or to satisfactorily respond to a FINRA request to provide information concerning the status of compliance.

Letter

Suspension

All capacities

indefinite

Continues until required payment is made or discharged.

11/24/2020

Pursuant to Article VI, Section 3 of FINRA By-Laws, and FINRA Rule 9554, Respondent Engler is suspended on November 24, 2020 for failure to comply with an arbitration award or settlement agreement or to satisfactorily respond to a FINRA request to provide information concerning the status of compliance.

Engler was named in a customer complaint that asserted the following causes of action: suitability; unauthorized trading; negligence; misrepresentation; elder abuse; failure to supervise; and disgorgement (quantum meruit).

$50,000.00

This award has not been paid by or on behalf of Engler as of November 24, 2020.

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission"), for its Complaint against Defendants Jonah Engler a/k/a Jonah Engler-Silberman ("Engler"), Joshua W. Turney ("Turney"), Hector Perez a/k/a Bruce Johnson ("Perez"), and Barbara Desiderio ("Desiderio"), (collectively, "Defendants"), alleges that Defendants, through their Commission-registered brokerage firm, conducted a fraudulent unauthorized trading scheme involving approximately 360 customer accounts during a period of more than two months, during a time when Engler and Desiderio suspected their firm would soon be forced to shut down. By making unauthorized trades in their customers' brokerage accounts, Defendants generated over $2.4 million in unlawful markups, markdowns and commissions (collectively, "commissions") for their firm-resulting in significant pay-outs for each of them-while causing over $4 million in net losses for their defrauded customers. In March 2015, Engler and Desiderio-who respectively controlled and served as a principal of Global Arena Capital Corporation ("Global"), a then-registered broker-dealer- learned that the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority ("FINRA"), a self-regulatory organization, would not approve their application to transfer ownership of Global to Engler's holding company. Engler, based on increasing scrutiny from FINRA into Global's sales practices, suspected he would soon be forced to close the firm. He decided to leave the securities business and close it down himself. Over the time remaining in which Global had left to operate, approximately April 1 through June 4, 2015, Engler directed Turney and Perez, registered representatives at Global, to engage in unauthorized trading to generate commission revenue. Unauthorized trading means ordering trades for non-discretionary customer accounts, i.e., accounts that require trades to be pre-authorized by customers, but without obtaining any customer authorizations. At Engler's direction and with Desiderio's knowledge, Turney and Perez attempted to cover up their unauthorized trading by making fake calls to their customers that included, for example, leaving long voicemails with their customers or placing the call on mute if the customer answered the phone, in an attempt to falsely suggest that the customer had authorized the trading. Defendants also routinely used system codes of other registered representatives at Global to obscure that Turney and Perez were the representatives responsible for these unauthorized trades-and in at least one instance, paid off a Global registered representative with a share of commissions in exchange for looking the other way while they fraudulently used his code. Turney and Perez, at Engler's direction and with Desiderio's knowing assistance, executed approximately 4,500 unauthorized trades in approximately 360 customer accounts. Of the $2.4 million in unlawful commissions generated from the unauthorized trading, Engler and companies he controlled received approximately $1.1 million, Turney received over $280,000, Perez received over $135,000, and Desiderio received over $390,000.

Judgment Rendered

Civil and Administrative Penalty(ies)/Fine(s)

Disgorgement

$1,440,683.51

Monetary Penalty other than Fines

Injunction

NEGLIGENCE AND GROSS NEGLIGENCE , BREACH OF CONTRACT, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY,

$26,000.00

MR. ENGLER DENIES ALL CLAIMS

ALASKA

RESPONDENTS ENGAGED IN DECEPTIVE AND MISLEADING SALES TACTICS WITH AN ELDERLY INVESTOR. RESPONDENTS DIRECTED JUNIOR AGENTS TO COLD CALL AN ELDERLY INVESTOR AND OTHER POTENTIAL CLIENTS AND TO MAKE DECEPTIVE AND MISLEADING REPRESENTATIONS REGARDING CERTAIN BONDS, PITCHING THEM AS SAFE INVESTMENTS AND PROMISING HIGH RATES OF RETURN, WHEN IN REALITY THE BONDS WERE JUNK BONDS RATED AS ONE STEP ABOVE DEFAULT STATUS BY BOND RATING AGENCIES. RESPONDENTS ALSO SENT ADDITIONAL OFFERS TO THE ELDERLY INVESTOR TO PURCHASE OTHER JUNK BONDS WITHOUT ANY CONSIDERATION FOR THE INVESTOR'S OBJECTIVES OR RISK TOLERANCE.

Order

Cease and Desist

Civil and Administrative Penalty(ies)/Fine(s)

$150,000.00

FINRA

ENGLER WAS NAMED A RESPONDENT IN A FINRA COMPLAINT ALLEGING THAT HE, WITH THE OTHER RESPONDENTS, FRAUDULENTLY SOLD A TOTAL OF NEARLY $3 MILLION WORTH OF SENIOR SECURED ZERO COUPON NOTES ISSUED BY AN ENTITY IN A PRIVATE PLACEMENT OFFERING TO CUSTOMERS. THE COMPLAINT ALLEGES THAT ENGLER AND THE OTHERS MISREPRESENTED MATERIAL FACTS ABOUT THE OFFERING, WHICH PROMISED TO PAY AN ASTRONOMICAL RETURN OF 100 PERCENT IN ONE YEAR BY PURPORTEDLY EXTRACTING PRECIOUS METALS FROM MATERIALS LEFT OVER FROM MINING OPERATIONS (KNOWN AS ORE CONCENTRATE). THE INVESTORS LOST ALL OF THE MONEY THAT THEY INVESTED IN THE NOTES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THREE INVESTORS WHO WERE REPAID IN A PONZI-LIKE MANNER WITH FUNDS FROM NEW INVESTORS. THE COMPLAINT ALSO ALLEGES THAT ENGLER AND THE OTHERS RECKLESSLY FAILED TO CONDUCT A REASONABLE INVESTIGATION OF THE VIABILITY AND LEGITIMACY OF THE ENTITY IN THE FACE OF NUMEROUS RED FLAGS THAT IT WAS A FRAUD. IN CONNECTION WITH THEIR SALES OF THE NOTES, ENGLER AND THE OTHERS RECKLESSLY MISREPRESENTED THAT THE NOTES WERE COLLATERALIZED BY CERTAIN BARRELS OF ORE CONCENTRATE AND THE ORE CONCENTRATE THAT SUPPOSEDLY SERVED AS THE COLLATERAL WAS OF SUFFICIENT VALUE TO SECURE AN INVESTMENT IN THE NOTES. IN FACT, THERE WAS NO COLLATERAL FOR THE NOTES, BECAUSE THE ENTITY DID NOT OWN ANY ORE CONCENTRATE, DESPITE A MISREPRESENTATION IN THE NOTES THAT OWNERSHIP OF ORE CONCENTRATE HAD BEEN TRANSFERRED TO INVESTORS. FURTHER, THE ORE CONCENTRATE THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO SERVE AS THE COLLATERAL WAS NEARLY WORTHLESS. ENGLER AND THE OTHERS, HAVING FAILED TO CONFIRM THAT THE COLLATERAL EXISTED AND THAT THE SUPPOSED COLLATERAL HAD ANY VALUE, RECKLESSLY MISREPRESENTED TO PROSPECTIVE PURCHASERS THAT THEIR INVESTMENTS WOULD BE ADEQUATELY SECURED BY COLLATERAL. ENGLER AND THE OTHERS RECKLESSLY MISREPRESENTED MATERIAL FACTS REGARDING THE NOTES TO THEIR CUSTOMERS, IN WILLFUL VIOLATION OF SECTION 10(B) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND RULE 10B-5 THEREUNDER. ALTERNATIVELY, ENGLER AND THE OTHERS NEGLIGENTLY MISREPRESENTED MATERIAL FACTS, IN CONTRAVENTION OF SECTIONS 17(A)(2) OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933. THE COMPLAINT FURTHER ALLEGES THAT ENGLER AND THE OTHERS FAILED TO OBTAIN BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE ENTITY THAT WAS NECESSARY TO THE DUE DILIGENCE PROCESS IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND AN INVESTMENT IN THE COMPANY. WITHOUT SUCH INFORMATION, THEY LACKED A REASONABLE BASIS TO RECOMMEND THE NOTES TO INVESTORS. ENGLER AND THE OTHERS DID NOT SATISFY THEIR REASONABLE BASIS SUITABILITY OBLIGATIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE NOTES. NONETHELESS, THEY RECOMMENDED THE SECURITIES TO THEIR CUSTOMERS. ENGLER AND THE OTHERS EACH LACKED A REASONABLE BASIS TO RECOMMEND THE NOTES TO THEIR CUSTOMERS IN LIGHT OF THEIR OBTAINING ONLY LIMITED INFORMATION ABOUT THE NOTES, THEIR LACK OF INVESTIGATION INTO THE ENTITY AND THE MULTIPLE RED FLAGS SURROUNDING THE OFFERING. IN ADDITION TO THE FAILURES BY ENGLER AND THE OTHERS TO INVESTIGATE AND UNDERSTAND THE NOTES AND IN LIGHT OF THE RED FLAGS SURROUNDING THE NOTES, THE NOTES WERE SIMPLY NOT A SUITABLE INVESTMENT FOR ANY INVESTOR.

Decision & Order of Offer of Settlement

Bar (Permanent)

All Capacities

7/1/2015

WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE ALLEGATIONS, ENGLER CONSENTED TO THE SANCTION AND TO THE ENTRY OF FINDINGS THAT HE RECKLESSLY MISREPRESENTED MATERIAL FACTS REGARDING NOTES ISSUED BY A COMPANY IN A PRIVATE PLACEMENT OFFERING TO HIS CUSTOMERS, IN WILLFUL VIOLATION OF SECTION 10(B) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND RULE 10B-5 THEREUNDER. THE FINDINGS STATED THAT IN CONNECTION WITH HIS SALES OF THE NOTES, ENGLER RECKLESSLY MISREPRESENTED THAT THE NOTES WERE COLLATERALIZED AND THAT THE COLLATERAL WAS OF SUFFICIENT VALUE TO SECURE AN INVESTMENT IN THE NOTES, WHEN IN FACT, THERE WAS NO COLLATERAL FOR THE NOTES. ENGLER, HAVING FAILED TO CONFIRM THAT THE COLLATERAL EXISTED AND THAT THE SUPPOSED COLLATERAL HAD ANY VALUE, RECKLESSLY MISREPRESENTED TO PROSPECTIVE PURCHASERS THAT THEIR INVESTMENTS WOULD BE ADEQUATELY SECURED BY COLLATERAL. THE FINDINGS ALSO STATED THAT ENGLER FAILED TO OBTAIN BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE COMPANY THAT WAS NECESSARY TO THE DUE DILIGENCE PROCESS IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND AN INVESTMENT IN THE COMPANY. WITHOUT SUCH INFORMATION, ENGLER LACKED A REASONABLE BASIS TO RECOMMEND THE NOTES TO INVESTORS. THE INVESTORS LOST ALL OF THE MONEY THAT THEY INVESTED IN THE NOTES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF INVESTORS WHO WERE REPAID WITH FUNDS FROM NEW INVESTORS.

MR.ENGLER DENIES THE CHARGES AND INTENDS TO VIGOROUSLY DEFEND THE MATTER.

SUITABILITY,BREACH OF FUDUCIARY DUTY, UNAUTHORIZED TRADING,FRAUD AND CHURNING

$100,000.00

$20,000.00

FIRM SETTLED TO AVOID ADDITIONAL LEGAL COST

CUSTOMER CLAIMS THAT RESPONDENTS WHILE EMPLOYED BY FIRST REPUBLIC GROUP LLC INTENTIONALLY MISMANAGED ACCOUNT OVER A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS CAUSING SIGNIFICANT LOSSES. CUSTOMER CLAIMS UNSUITABLE TRADING, EXCESSIVE COSTS FEES AND CHARGES, MUTUAL FUND SWITCHING, CHURNING AND EXCESSIVE COMMISSIONS.

$300,000.00

$135,000.00

BREACH OF CONTRACT, COMMON LAW FRAUD, UNSUITABILITY, NEGLIGENCE.

$191,308.00

$80,000.00

UNAUTHORIZED TRADING, UNSUITABLE TRANSACTIONS

$33,281.85

$10,000.00

NEGLIGENCE, UNSSUITABLE INVESTMENTS, MISREPRESENTATION. JUNE 2008 TO MARCH 2011

$450,000.00

$46,667.67

CUSTOMER COMPLAINED ABOUT THE NATURE AND PERFORMANCE OF A RECOMMENDATION MADE BY THE REPRESENTATIVE. THE REPRESENTATIVE RECOMMENDED SELLING A POSITION IN PWE AND USING THE PROCEEDS TO PURCHASE FRE. CUSTOMER IS UNHAPPY THAT THE NEW POSITION HAS DECLINED IN VALUE SINCE THE REPRESENTATIVE ADVISED THE CUSTOMER THAT HE BELIEVED THAT INVESTMENT WOULD WORK OUT FAVORABLY.

$10,080.77

$5,000.00

COMPLAINT FORWARDED FROM FINRA 2/3/10 AND IS CURRENTLY IN REVIEW. UPON THE CLOSING OF THIS MATTER, DRP WILL BE UPDATED APPROPRIATELY. 5/18/2010 - SETTLEMENT REACHED WITH CUSTOMER FOR $5000.00 - ALTHOUGH THE CUSTOMER FULLY AUTHORIZED THE PURCHASE OF THE SECURITY IN QUESTION AND UNDERSTOOD THE RISKS INVOLVED, I CHOSE TO SETTLE WITH THE CUSTOMER AS THE EXPENSE OF FURTHERING THE MATTER WOULD FAR EXCEED THE CURRENT SETTLEMENT AMOUNT.

FROM JULY 2005 THROUGH FEBRUARY 2008 CUSTOMER ALLEGES UNAUTHORIZED TRADING, UNAUTHORIZED USE OF MARGIN, OVER-CONCENTRATION OF AN ACCOUNT, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTIES AND NEGLIGENCE.

$890,000.00

$55,000.00

SETTLEMENT WAS REACHED WITH THE CUSTOMER RATHER THAN INCUR ADDITIONAL LEGAL EXPENSES TO DEFEND THE MATTER.

UNSUITABLE RECOMMENDATIONS, MARGIN TRADING WITHOUT PROPER DISCLOSURE, SOLICITING AND EXECUTING TRADES IN A STATE WHERE THE REPRESENTATIVE WAS ALLEGED TO NOT BE REGISTERED, MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATIONS.

$261,402.00

$80,000.00

THE ACTION IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING COMPELLED TO FINRA ARBITRATION PURSUANT TO THE CUSTOMER AGREEMENT. NOTE THAT THE FIRM'S INITIAL REVIEW OF THE ALLEGATIONS DOES NOT REVEAL ANY ISSUES PERTAINING TO IMPROPER REGISTRATION OR DOCUMENTATION AND THE FIRM WILL CONTINUE TO EVALUATE THE CLAIMS AND DEFEND THE MATTER AS APPROPRIATE. ON 9/1/09 THE MATTER WAS COMPELLED TO FINRA ARBITRATION WHICH IS CURRENTLY PENDING. 9/174/10: MATTER WAS COMPELLED TO ARBITRATION (09-5126). WAS SETTLED FOR $80,000.00, WITH MR. ENGLER AGREEING TO PAY $40,000.00 AND THE FIRM, DAWSON JAMES SECURITIES AGREEING TO PAY $40,000.00,

CUSTOMER ALLEGED THAT IN CONSIDERATION OF HIM TRANSFERRING HIS ACCOUNTS TO DAWSON JAMES THAT HE HAD AN AGREEMENT WITH THE REGISTERED REP THAT NO COMMISSIONS WOULD BE CHARGED FOR THE FIRST 6 MONTHS FOLLOWING THE TRANSFERS. CUSTOMER ALLEGED THAT THIS AGREEMENT WAS NOT UPHELD.

$12,500.00

$9,900.00

THOUGH NO EXCESSIVE FEES WERE ALLEGED OR DETERMINED TO EXIST, THE FIRM, RR AND CLIENT AGREED TO A REIMBURSEMENT OF A PORTION OF THE TRANSACTION FEES CHARGED TO THE ACCOUNTS IN QUESTION AS A GOOD WILL GESTURE.

SENIOR PARTNER IN A LAW FIRM, AN ESTABLISHED CUSTOMER, MADE A SERIES OF PURCHASES OF RF MICRO DEVICES TOTALING 51,000 SHARES. ONE MONTH LATER, AFTER STOCK DECLINED IN VALUE, CUSTOMER SOLD THE SHARES FOR A LOSS OF APPROXIMATELY $63,000. HE SOUGHT TO RECOUP THAT LOSS BY CLAIMING A PURCHASE OF MORE THAN 1,000 SHARES OF THAT ISSUE WAS INAPPROPRIATE GIVEN AMOUNT HE HAD INVESTED WITH FIRM. CUSTOMER ALSO CLAIMS HE WAS PROMISED (BY ANOTHER BROKER WHO IS NO LONGER WITH THE FIRM), AND NEVER RECEIVED, A $5000 COMMISSION CREDIT.

$68,000.00

ALLEGATIONS ARE DENIED IN FULL.

UNAUTHORIZED TRANSACTION

UNAUTHORIZED TRADING

[CUSTOMER] HAD A HISTORY OF PAYING FOR AGREED PURCHASES AND UPON A DECLINE IN THE SECURITY WOULD CLAIM THAT THE TRANSACTION WAS UNAUTHORIZED. THESE CLAIMS WOULD OFTEN BE RECEIVED 3-6 MONTHS AFTER THE PURCHASE HAD SETTLED AND BEEN PAID FOR. [CUSTOMER] MADE AN INITIAL DEPOSIT OF $50,000.00 AND CONTINUED TO BUILD HIS ACCOUNT TO OVER $1,000.000.00. I VEHEMENTLY DENY ANY AND ALL ALLEGATIONS [CUSTOMER] HAS MADE REGARDING HIS ACCOUNT. HIS CLAIM OF UNAUTHORIZED TRADING WAS ULTIMATELY DENIED.

EXCESS COMMISSIONS, 1/2003 TO 2/2004

$60,000.00

$35,000.00

AFTER TRADING FOR 14 MONTHS CLIENT WANTED TO RECOUP SOME OF HIS LOSSES BY CLAIMING EXCESS COMMISSIONS WERE CHARGED. CLAIM IS BASELESS AND WITHOUT MERIT. SETTLEMENT WAS REACHED FOR NUISANCE VALUE.

OVER PURCHASE

$1,000.00

$3,000.00

SETTELED FOR NUSCIENCE VALUE ONLY. CUSTOMER PLACED A GOOD ORDER TO BUY MATEL. SIX MONTHS LATER THE STOCK DECLINED IN VALUE CUSTOMER CLAIMED HE NEVER PLACED THE TRADE.