Notes 'Backed by $7.98 Billion' From Qatar's Royal Family: Court Enters Final Judgments in Gauntlet Holdings Fraud Case

Published Oct. 12, 2026. Case statuses are current as of that date, based on SEC records.

One pitch claimed promissory notes were backed by $7.98 billion held at a bank in Doha by Qatar's royal family. Another sent an investor a video supposedly showing the company's online bank account. A federal court has now entered final judgments in the Securities and Exchange Commission's case.

On July 15, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California entered a final judgment against Gauntlet Holdings, LLC and its managing member, Darrell W. Rideaux [1]. The case is SEC v. Gauntlet Holdings, LLC, et al., No. 25-cv-00492, filed March 13, 2025.

The court previously entered a final judgment by default against defendant Ali Derakhshanfar on Nov. 4, 2025, and a final consent judgment against relief defendant Sal N. Ortiz on July 14, 2025 [1]. A relief defendant is not accused of wrongdoing; the SEC names one to recover funds it says the person received from the alleged scheme.

What the SEC alleged

The complaint described two schemes [1]:

1. The "Qatar" notes. Gauntlet, Rideaux and Derakhshanfar allegedly sold a company promissory notes they falsely claimed were backed by $7.98 billion held at a bank in Doha by the royal family of Qatar.
2. The $1 million investor. Gauntlet and Rideaux allegedly took $1 million from an individual investor with a promise of high returns. The investor never received any profit or got the money back. Rideaux allegedly made numerous misrepresentations, including sending a misleading video purporting to show Gauntlet's online bank account, when the account did not belong to Gauntlet.

We do not name the company or the individual investor.

What the court ordered

The final judgments permanently enjoin Gauntlet, Rideaux and Derakhshanfar from violating the antifraud provisions of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 [1]. In addition:

• Gauntlet and Rideaux, jointly and severally: $842,500 disgorgement, $165,809 prejudgment interest and an $842,500 civil penalty.
• Derakhshanfar (by default): $500,000 disgorgement, $143,837 prejudgment interest and a $500,000 civil penalty.
• Ortiz (relief defendant, by consent): $142,500 disgorgement.

The release does not say whether Gauntlet and Rideaux's judgment was entered by consent or after contested proceedings, and it does not mention a criminal case.

The "sovereign wealth" and "bank screenshot" playbook

Claims that an investment is backed by royal families, sovereign funds or secret bank instruments are a long-running fraud theme, because they are nearly impossible for an ordinary person to check. Screenshots and screen-recorded videos of "bank accounts" are just as easy to fake or borrow. A real bank guarantee can be confirmed directly with the issuing bank through contact details you look up yourself.

How an SEC civil case works

The Securities and Exchange Commission is a civil regulator. It cannot send anyone to prison. When it sues, it asks a federal judge for remedies such as an injunction (a court order not to break the securities laws again), disgorgement (giving up money obtained through the alleged violations), prejudgment interest, civil penalties, and sometimes bars from serving as a company officer or director or from working in the securities industry. Criminal charges, when they exist, are brought separately by the Justice Department.

A complaint is the SEC's side of the story. Until a court rules, or a defendant settles, the claims in it are allegations. Many defendants settle "without admitting or denying" the allegations, which means they accept a judgment and its penalties without conceding that the SEC's account is accurate. A "consent" that is "subject to court approval" is not final until a judge signs it. A "bifurcated" settlement resolves liability and the injunction now while leaving the dollar amounts for the judge to decide later. A default judgment is entered when a defendant does not respond to the lawsuit; it is a ruling against that defendant, but it is not a finding after a trial.

Red flags of "backed by billions" pitches

• Notes said to be guaranteed by royalty, governments or secret bank funds.
• Proof offered only as screenshots or videos of an account.
• Huge stated backing paired with a modest, urgent ask.
• No way to contact the supposed bank independently.

Before you hand anyone money for an investment

• Check the seller. Search the person and firm on Investor.gov and FINRA BrokerCheck. People who sell securities for commissions generally must be registered.
• Check the offering. Search the company name in the SEC's EDGAR database and your state securities regulator's enforcement actions.
• Treat "guaranteed" returns as a warning. Real investments carry risk. Promises of fixed monthly profits, or a guarantee that you can't lose your principal, are hallmarks of Ponzi-style schemes.
• Watch for pressure and secrecy. Deadlines, "sold out" claims, or requests to wire money to a personal or unfamiliar account deserve a pause.
• Ask how you get your money out. Excuses, delays, or new conditions when you try to withdraw are a serious red flag.

If you think you were affected

1. Save your records: account statements, wire confirmations, emails, texts and marketing materials.
2. Report it to the SEC at sec.gov/tcr and to your state securities regulator. If money was stolen, you can also report to the FBI at ic3.gov.
3. Follow the court case. If a receiver or fair fund is created, notices about claims are usually posted on the court docket or a receiver's website. The SEC does not charge fees to return money.
4. Beware of "recovery" offers. Scammers often target people who already lost money, promising to get it back for an upfront fee.

Case status (as of Oct. 12, 2026)

Defendant	Court	Status	Source
Darrell W. Rideaux	U.S. District Court, C.D. Cal. (No. 25-cv-00492)	Final judgment entered July 15, 2026 (injunction; joint $842,500 disgorgement, $165,809 interest, $842,500 penalty with Gauntlet)	[1]
Gauntlet Holdings, LLC	Same	Final judgment entered July 15, 2026	[1]
Ali Derakhshanfar	Same	Final judgment by default Nov. 4, 2025 ($500,000 disgorgement, $143,837 interest, $500,000 penalty)	[1]
Sal N. Ortiz (relief defendant)	Same	Final consent judgment July 14, 2025 ($142,500 disgorgement); not accused of wrongdoing	[1]

Statuses can change. An SEC complaint contains allegations, not findings, unless a court has ruled.

Sources

1. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Litigation Release No. 26594, "SEC Obtains Final Judgments Against California-Based Company, Two Individuals, and Relief Defendant for Their Roles in Alleged Offering Fraud Schemes," July 24, 2026. https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26594

---

Corrections and updates: If you are named in this article, or represent someone who is, and believe anything here is inaccurate or out of date (including a dismissal, judgment, settlement or change in case status), please contact us at editorandchief@scammers.com. We will review it and update the article promptly.