⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Ninth Circuit reviews Volodimyr Pigida's convictions arising from Trend Sound Promoter, which the jury found was a Ponzi scheme. Gonzaga law professor Brooks Holland will argue for Pigida that jurors were unfairly told the Securities and Exchange Commission had referred the business as a possible Ponzi scheme, that they needed clearer instructions to agree on one conspiracy, and that the Supreme Court's Thompson decision distinguishing false statements from merely misleading ones affects a bankruptcy count. Assistant U.S. Attorney Philip Kopczynski will argue that the evidence and instructions do not justify reversal and that Pigida did not merit a sentencing reduction for accepting responsibility. The court later affirmed, holding that the challenged rulings were correct or harmless, that omitting a $1.45 million withdrawal was false, and that flight before sentencing undercut Pigida's claim of responsibility.

United States v. Pigida (No. 24-3223, 24-3224) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 3, 2026.