UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Before the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Release No. 40490 / September 28, 1998 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING File No. 3-9635 ______________________________ In the Matter of : : ORDER MAKING FINDINGS AND IMPOSING CHRISTOPHER M. PEDERSEN : REMEDIAL SANCTIONS BY DEFAULT : AGAINST RESPONDENT CHRISTOPHER M. : PEDERSEN ______________________________: On June 25, 1998, the Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) issued an Order Instituting Public Administrative Proceeding (OIP) against Respondent Christopher M. Pedersen. The OIP ordered Respondent Pedersen to file an answer to the Commission's allegations within 20 days of service of the OIP, as provided by Rule 220 of the Commission's Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. 201.220. The Secretary of the Commission was unable to accomplish service by certified mail, so the Division of Enforcement (Division) retained a process server who personally served Respondent Pedersen with the OIP and accompanying documents on August 12, 1998, in accordance with Rules 141(a) and 200, 17 C.F.R. 201.141(a), .200. Respondent Pedersen did not file an answer within 20 days of service, and has yet to file one. On September 3, 1998, the Division filed a Motion for Default pursuant to Rules 155(a) and 220(f), 17 C.F.R. 201.155(a), .220(f). On September 11, 1998, I ordered Respondent Pedersen to show cause why he should not be held in default, and why I should not sanction him pursuant to Sections 15(b) and 19(h) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act). Respondent Pedersen is in default because he failed to answer the OIP. He also failed to respond to the Division's Motion for Default, and the show cause order I issued on September 11, 1998. Accordingly, I find that the allegations in the OIP are true: A. Pedersen was licensed as a securities principal, registered representative and general agent (Series 39, Series 22 and Series 63, respectively), from 1985 until 1993, when his licenses were voluntarily terminated. B. On April 21, 1998, a final judgment was entered by the United States District Court, Central District of California, permanently enjoining Pedersen from future violations of Section 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and assessing a $400,000 civil penalty against Pedersen. SEC v. Pedersen, Civil Action No. 95-6488 WJR (RNBx). C. The Commission's Complaint in SEC v. Pedersen alleged fraud in connection with the offer and sale of unregistered securities, primarily in the form of oil and gas limited partnerships. Specifically, the Complaint alleged that Pedersen made material misrepresentations and omissions in connection with the offer and sale of interests in various investment programs concerning, among other things, the purchase of bonds purportedly backing oil and gas limited partnership investments, the use of funds raised for investment programs and the financial stability of the entities through which the investment programs were offered. Pedersen also withdrew undisclosed salary "advances" and "officer loans" from the entities and investment programs, and did not disclose that the entities were in serious financial decline from at least July of 1991. In addition to moving for an order of default against Respondent Pedersen, the Division filed a request dated September 22, 1998, that the Commission take official notice of the Judgment entered by the court in SEC v. Pedersen, the Complaint filed in that action, and the contents of both the Judgment and the Complaint. I hereby take official notice of the Judgment and Complaint in SEC v. Pederson and the contents thereof pursuant to Rule 323, 17 C.F.R. 201.323. In view of the foregoing, I find it in the public interest to sanction Pedersen pursuant to Sections 15(b) and 19(h) of the Exchange Act. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Christopher M. Pedersen is barred from association with any broker, dealer, or member of a national securities exchange or registered securities association. A hearing in this matter is currently scheduled to take place on September 30, 1998. The Division has moved for an order vacating this hearing date. I hereby ORDER that the hearing date is vacated. ____________________________ Lillian A. McEwen Administrative Law Judge