Key Takeaways
- • The SEC charged Nathan Fuller, founder of Privvy Investments LLC (operating as Gateway Digital Investments), with orchestrating a $12.3 million crypto fraud scheme involving fake AI trading bots that promised returns of 40–50% in 30–45 days or guaranteed profits exceeding 100% in 21 days.
- • Fuller raised approximately $12.3 million from roughly 150 investors across nine states and two foreign countries between October 2022 and mid-2024, using only about $380,000 (3% of funds raised) to purchase crypto while generating no profit.
- • The complaint alleges Fuller misappropriated at least $6.2 million for personal expenses including a $1 million house, gambling, trading cards, travel, and a Jeep, while routing approximately $5.5 million in Ponzi-like payments to earlier investors to suppress complaints.
- • Fuller fabricated multiple credentials to legitimize the scheme, falsely claiming he held a Texas money-transmitter license, surety bond, FDIC insurance protections, and professional-liability coverage; he invented a fake insurer called Texas Guarantors & Securities and altered a genuine biBERK certificate to fraudulently claim $5 million in coverage explicitly excluded under the actual policy.
- • The scheme's stated AI technology did not function as advertised—the underlying code contained no artificial intelligence or stop-loss functionality—demonstrating a fundamental disconnection between promised capabilities and operational reality.
Summary
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed a complaint on May 28, 2026, in federal court in Houston against Nathan Fuller, a Cyprus, Texas resident, alleging he operated a $12.3 million cryptocurrency fraud scheme centered on fictitious AI-powered trading bots. Between October 2022 and mid-2024, Fuller, operating under the names Privvy Investments LLC and Gateway Digital Investments, solicited approximately 150 investors across nine states and two foreign countries.
The core misrepresentation involved claims that proprietary AI-based bots would autonomously monitor cryptocurrency trading platforms to execute high-frequency arbitrage trades capturing small price gaps. Fuller promised investors returns of 40–50% within 30–45 days, with some investors allegedly told they could earn guaranteed profits exceeding 100% in as little as 21 days. These promises formed the foundation of the investment pitch and attracted substantial capital.
In reality, the advertised technology did not exist. The SEC's complaint states that Fuller deployed only approximately $380,000 of the $12.3 million raised—approximately 3% of total funds—to purchase cryptocurrency assets, generating no profit from trading activities. The underlying code, to the extent it functioned at all, contained neither artificial intelligence nor stop-loss mechanisms that would have been essential for the described arbitrage strategy. Instead of deploying capital as promised, Fuller allegedly misappropriated at least $6.2 million for personal use, including purchase of a $1 million house, gambling expenditures, trading card acquisitions, travel, and a Jeep. Additionally, Fuller routed approximately $5.5 million back to earlier investors in Ponzi-scheme mechanics designed to create the appearance of successful returns and suppress investor concerns.
To reinforce investor confidence, Fuller made multiple false representations including claims that he held a Texas money-transmitter license, a surety bond, FDIC insurance protections, and professional-liability coverage backing the venture. The SEC's investigation revealed none of these credentials were legitimate. Fuller fabricated an insurance company called Texas Guarantors & Securities and altered a genuine biBERK certificate to fraudulently display $5 million in professional-liability coverage that the actual policy explicitly excluded. The fraudulent cover-up itself reportedly employed AI technology, adding an ironic dimension to a scheme premised on deceptive AI claims.
The case represents a significant enforcement action targeting the intersection of cryptocurrency fraud and artificial intelligence misrepresentation, highlighting regulatory focus on schemes leveraging emerging technology narratives to attract institutional and retail capital.
The core misrepresentation involved claims that proprietary AI-based bots would autonomously monitor cryptocurrency trading platforms to execute high-frequency arbitrage trades capturing small price gaps. Fuller promised investors returns of 40–50% within 30–45 days, with some investors allegedly told they could earn guaranteed profits exceeding 100% in as little as 21 days. These promises formed the foundation of the investment pitch and attracted substantial capital.
In reality, the advertised technology did not exist. The SEC's complaint states that Fuller deployed only approximately $380,000 of the $12.3 million raised—approximately 3% of total funds—to purchase cryptocurrency assets, generating no profit from trading activities. The underlying code, to the extent it functioned at all, contained neither artificial intelligence nor stop-loss mechanisms that would have been essential for the described arbitrage strategy. Instead of deploying capital as promised, Fuller allegedly misappropriated at least $6.2 million for personal use, including purchase of a $1 million house, gambling expenditures, trading card acquisitions, travel, and a Jeep. Additionally, Fuller routed approximately $5.5 million back to earlier investors in Ponzi-scheme mechanics designed to create the appearance of successful returns and suppress investor concerns.
To reinforce investor confidence, Fuller made multiple false representations including claims that he held a Texas money-transmitter license, a surety bond, FDIC insurance protections, and professional-liability coverage backing the venture. The SEC's investigation revealed none of these credentials were legitimate. Fuller fabricated an insurance company called Texas Guarantors & Securities and altered a genuine biBERK certificate to fraudulently display $5 million in professional-liability coverage that the actual policy explicitly excluded. The fraudulent cover-up itself reportedly employed AI technology, adding an ironic dimension to a scheme premised on deceptive AI claims.
The case represents a significant enforcement action targeting the intersection of cryptocurrency fraud and artificial intelligence misrepresentation, highlighting regulatory focus on schemes leveraging emerging technology narratives to attract institutional and retail capital.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.