SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

   Litigation Release No. 16952 / April 4, 2001

   Federal Judge Permanently Enjoins Sean T. Healey

   Securities and Exchange Commission v. Rajiv Vohra, Sean T. Healey,
   Lantern Investments, Ltd., Lipton Holdings, Ltd., and Beaufort
   Holdings, Ltd., Civil Action No. 00-7286-Civ-Seitz/Garber (SDFL March
   26, 2001)

   The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that the
   Honorable Patricia A. Seitz, United States District Judge for the
   Southern District of Florida, entered a Judgment of Permanent
   Injunction and Other Relief Against Defendant Sean T. Healey
   ("Healey"), restraining and enjoining him from further violations of
   Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the
   Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Healey
   consented to the entry of the judgment without admitting or denying
   any of the allegations of the Commission's complaint. Further, the
   Court ordered disgorgement against Healey in the amount of $66,821,
   prejudgment interest in the amount of $12,358, and a civil penalty in
   the amount of $66,821.

   On September 5, 2000, the Commission alleged in its Complaint that
   defendants Healey, Rajiv Vohra ("Vohra"), and three Bahamian
   companies, Lantern Investments, Ltd., Lipton Holdings, Ltd., and
   Beaufort Holdings, Ltd., used "wash sales" to create the appearance of
   active stock trading in the stock of New Directions Manufacturing,
   Inc., a small furniture manufacturing company quoted on the NASD's OTC
   Bulletin Board system. The Complaint alleged that Healey and Vohra
   then arranged to have a false and misleading research report published
   on a stock-picker web site, on their own web site, and through
   unsolicited mass e-mails ("spam"). The research report falsely claimed
   that New Directions had significantly expanded, that the author of the
   report was an independent analyst, and that the purported analyst had
   issued a buy recommendation. Healey and Vohra attempted to conceal
   their scheme by conducting much of their activity through Canadian
   brokerage accounts and the Bahamian companies.

   For tips on how to avoid Internet "pump-and-dump" stock manipulation
   schemes, visit . For more information about Internet fraud, visit . To
   report suspicious activity involving possible Internet fraud, visit .
   For a description of other SEC enforcement actions involved in this
   Internet Market Manipulation Sweep, visit .

   See also L.R. 16687 (September 6, 2000).
     _________________________________________________________________