SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 17778 / October 8, 2002

   UNITED STATES v. MICHAEL A. ROBLES, S1 00 1169 (RMB).

   Securities and Exchange Commission v. Richard A. Svoboda and Michael
   A. Robles, 00 Civ. No. 8557 (MBM) (Southern District of New York)
   (filed November 7, 2000)

   JURY FINDS CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT GUILTY OF INSIDER TRADING

   On October 3, 2002, after a three-week trial, a federal jury in the
   United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
   found Michael A. Robles, a certified public accountant based in
   Dallas, Texas, guilty on charges of participating in a massive
   insider-trading scheme that yielded illegal profits of more than $1.3
   million in 31 different stocks. According to the evidence at trial,
   from 1995 through 1997, Robles received inside information from his
   long-time friend Richard A. Svoboda, who was employed as a credit
   policy officer at NationsBank, N.A. In violation of NationsBank's
   policies, Svoboda misappropriated confidential information about
   yet-to-be-announced tender offers and financial results involving
   NationsBank's clients, and disclosed it to Robles, who traded in
   advance of the public announcements of tender offers or financial
   results. Robles was convicted of one count of conspiracy, 9 counts of
   securities fraud and 4 counts of tender offer fraud. In February 2002,
   Svoboda pled guilty to conspiracy, securities fraud, and tender offer
   fraud charges.

   The Commission's civil action against Robles and Svoboda, filed at the
   same time a grand jury in the Southern District of New York indicted
   them, was stayed pending the outcome of the criminal trial. Once the
   stay is lifted, the Commission intends to pursue its claims against
   Robles and Svoboda, for engaging in illegal insider trading in
   violation of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections
   10(b) and 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rules
   10b-5 and 14e-3 thereunder, and to seek injunctive relief,
   disgorgement, and civil monetary penalties.

   For further information, see (November 7, 2000)


     _________________________________________________________________

Modified 10/09/2002