The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) took legal action against Taino Lopez and Alexander Mehr, co -founders of Retail E -Commerce Ventures LLC (REV) and Managing Director of Maya Burkenroad.
The SEC complaint, which was filed on September 23, 2025, with the Florida South province court, claims that from about April 2020 to November 2022, the defendants raised about $ 112 million in combination with hundreds Shipping of the missions issued by eight Revolio portfolios that manage and defend.
Rev’s primary business was the purchase of the distressed retail companies with the recognition of a brand name and their conversion to businesses only in e -commerce. Mobile values involved in bids by Rev and eight Rev portfolio: Brahms LLC, Dress Barn Online, Inc., Franklin Mint Online, LLC, Linens’ N Things, Inc., Modell’s Sporting Goods Online, Inc.
Rev served as a portfolio company and director of the Rev brand marks.
During the relative period, the defendants sold securities in the form of unpaid notes that promise up to 25% annual returns as well as shares (membership units) with a monthly preferential dividend of 2.083%.
The supposed purpose of the bids was to raise funds to obtain its predecessor in any specific Rev brand and to collect additional operating capital for this brand Rev Retailer.
In relation to these bids, Lopez and Mehr made material false statements and were omitted to keep the important facts needed to make statements, in the light of the circumstances, not misleading, for the success and profitability of the business model of Rev.
In at least one advertising video available on the internet, Lopez set the Rev’s approach as “one of the best strategies you can invest.” The defendants further assured investors that while other businesses may be fighting, their portfolio companies were “in fire” and that “cash flow is strong”.
The defendants also assured investors that the funds raised for a particular portfolio company would be used for the company and that Rev and Retail brands have never been able to pay a single investor.
Unlike these performances, while some of the Rev retail brands have generated revenue, no one created profits.
Consequently, in order to pay interest, dividends and spawning payments, the defendants resorted to the use of a combination of loans by external lenders, commercial cash advances, money raised by new and existing investors and transport from other portfolio companies.
At least $ 5.9 million from the yields distributed to investors were, in fact, the Ponzi type payments funded by other investors.
In addition, the defendants abused about $ 16.1 million in investor capital, which are diverted for the personal use of Lopez and Mehr.
The Securities and Exchange Commission accuses the accused of violations of Articles 17 (A) (1) and 17 (3) of the 1933 Mobile Values Act (“Law on Mobile Values”) [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)(1) and (3)]Article 10 (b) of the 1934 Mobile Exchange Act (“Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)]and Article 10b-5 (a) and (c) [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5(a) and (c)].
The defendants Lopez and Mehr allegedly violated and the accused BurkenRead helped and ruled out the violations of Lopez and Mehr, Article 17 (a) (2) of the Mobile Values Act [15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)(2)] and section 10 (b) of the law on exchange [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Article 10b-5 (b) [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5(b)].
The regulator seeks permanent orders, employees and director, monetary sanctions against the defendants. In addition, the Securities and Exchange Commission seeks to prohibit the bias interest against Lopez and Mehr.