NXORA.PH

​ENFORCEMENT AND INVESTOR PROTECTION DEPARTMENT​ ​In the matter of:​ ​NXORA.PH​ ​EIPD Order No.​ ​2026 - 0012​ ​Promulgated:​ ​28 September 2026​ ​x-----------------------------x​ ​CEASE AND DESIST ORDER​ ​Pursuant​ ​to​ ​the​ ​mandate​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Enforcement​​and​​Investor​​Protection​​Department​​(EIPD)​​to​​protect​ ​the​ ​investing​ ​public,​ ​and​ ​upon​ ​a​ ​finding​ ​of​ ​prima​ ​facie​ ​evidence​ ​of​ ​violations​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Securities​ ​Regulation​ ​Code​ ​(SRC;),​ ​the​ ​Financial​ ​Products​​and​​Services​​Consumer​​Protection​​Act​​(FCPA;),​​and​ ​other​ ​laws,​ ​rules,​ ​and​ ​regulations​ ​enforced​​by​​the​​Securities​​and​​Exchange​​Commission​​(SEC;),​​the​ ​EIPD​​hereby​​issues​​this​​Cease​​and​​Desist​​Order​​(CDO;)​​against​​NXORA.PH​,​​and​​all​​persons​​acting​​for​ ​and​ ​on​ ​its​ ​behalf,​ ​for​ ​engaging​ ​in​ ​the​ ​unauthorized​ ​offer​ ​and​​sale​​of​​unregistered​​securities​​in​​the​ ​form​ ​of​ ​investment​ ​contracts,​ ​soliciting​ ​investments​ ​from​ ​the​ ​public​ ​without​ ​the​ ​requisite​ ​registration​ ​and​ ​license​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Securities​ ​and​ ​Exchange​ ​Commission,​ ​and​ ​committing​ ​acts​ ​constituting investment fraud.​ ​THE RELEVANT FACTS​ ​The​ ​Department​ ​conducted​ ​cyber​ ​patrolling​ ​and​ ​gathered​ ​publicly​ ​available​ ​information​ ​to​ ​determine​ ​the​ ​nature​ ​of​ ​the​ ​entity’s​ ​activities​ ​and​ ​assess​ ​whether​ ​such​ ​activities​ ​fall​ ​within​ ​the​ ​regulatory jurisdiction of the Commission.​ ​Initial​ ​verification​ ​through​ ​the​ ​Commissions​ ​database​ ​revealed​ ​that​ ​NXORA.PH​ ​is​ ​NOT​ ​REGISTERED​​with the Commission as a corporation.​ ​The​ ​Department​ ​conducted​ ​cyber​ ​patrolling​ ​and​ ​gathered​ ​publicly​ ​available​ ​information​ ​to​ ​determine​ ​the​ ​nature​ ​of​ ​the​ ​entity's​ ​activities​ ​and​ ​assess​ ​whether​ ​such​ ​activities​ ​fall​ ​within​ ​the​ ​regulatory jurisdiction of the Commission.​ ​Based​ ​on​ ​the​ ​information​ ​gathered​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Commission,​ ​NXORA.PH​ ​presents​ ​itself​ ​as​ ​a​ ​next-generation​​trading​​and​​investment​​platform​​that​​claims​​to​​utilize​​major​​brokerage​​platforms​​to​ ​help grow investors' capital through secure trading.​ ​Furthermore,​​based​​on​​the​​online​​materials​​posted​​by​​NXORA.PH​,​​the​​entity​​appears​​to​​be​​offering​ ​investment​ ​opportunities​ ​to​ ​the​ ​public​ ​with​ ​minimum​ ​investment​ ​amounts​ ​ranging​ ​from​ ​One​ ​Thousand​​Pesos​​(₱1,000.00)​​to​​One​​Hundred​​Thousand​​Pesos​​(₱100,000.00)​.​​According​​to​​its​ ​promotional​ ​materials,​ ​investors​ ​may​ ​earn​ ​a​ ​120%​​profit​​within​​30​​days​​through​​its​​Premium​ ​Lock-In​ ​Program​.​ ​Upon​ ​the​ ​program's​ ​maturity,​ ​the​ ​investor's​ ​original​ ​capital​ ​is​ ​also​ ​returned,​ ​resulting in a​​total payout of up to 220%​​inclusive​​of direct referral and leadership bonus.​ ​The​ ​Department​ ​further​ ​found​ ​that,​ ​NXORA.PH​ ​maintains​ ​an​ ​online​ ​presence​ ​through​ ​various​ ​Facebook​ ​pages​ ​and​ ​groups,​ ​where​ ​it​ ​allegedly​ ​promotes​​an​​unauthorized​​investment​​scheme​​and​ ​encourages the public to invest through its purported automated trading bot.​

​In the Matter of:​​NXORA.PH​ ​EIPD​​Order No.​​2026-0012​ ​CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER​ ​Page​​2​​of​​7​ ​x----------------------------------------------------------------------x​ ​To​​substantiate​​the​​allegation​​that​​“​NXORA.PH​”​​is​​engaged​​in​​the​​offer/sale​​of​​unregistered​​securities​ ​without​ ​the​ ​requisite​ ​license​ ​from​​the​​Commission,​​the​​EIPD​​obtained​​Certifications​​issued​​by​​the​ ​Commission’s​ ​Company​ ​Registration​ ​and​ ​Monitoring​ ​Department​ ​(CRMD),​ ​Markets​​and​​Securities​ ​Regulation​ ​Department​​(MSRD)​​and​​Corporate​​Governance​​and​​Finance​​Department​​(CGFD),​​which​ ​all​ ​certify​ ​that​ ​“​NXORA.PH​”​ ​is​ ​not​ ​registered​​with​​the​​Commission​​either​​as​​a​​corporation​​or​​as​​a​ ​partnership;​ ​has​ ​not​ ​registered​ ​any​ ​securities​ ​under​ ​Section​ ​8​ ​and​ ​12​ ​of​ ​the​ ​SRC;​​has​​not​​filed​​an​ ​application​​for​​the​​registration​​of,​​and/or​​a​​license​​to​​sell​​securities;​​has​​not​​been​​issued​​any​​license​ ​to​ ​sell​ ​securities;​ ​and​ ​is​ ​not​ ​a​ ​registered​ ​issuer​ ​of​ ​mutual​ ​funds,​ ​exchange​ ​traded​ ​funds​ ​and​ ​proprietary/non-proprietary​​shares​​or​​membership​​certificates​​and​​timeshares​​under​​Sections​​8​​and​ ​12 of the SRC.​ ​FINDINGS OF THE DEPARTMENT​ ​Section 3.1 of the SRC defines “securities” as follows:​ ​“3.1.​​“​Securities​”​​are​​shares,​​participation​​or​​interests​​in​​a​​corporation​​or​​in​​a​ ​commercial​​enterprise​​or​​profit-making​​venture​​and​​evidenced​​by​​a​​certificate,​ ​contract, instrument, whether written or electronic in character. It​​includes​:​ ​xxx​ ​(b)​ ​Investment​ ​contracts​,​ ​certificates​ ​of​ ​interest​ ​or​ ​participation​ ​in​ ​a​ ​profit-sharing agreement, certificates of deposit for a future subscription; xxx”​ ​An​ ​investment​ ​contract​ ​is​ ​defined​ ​under​ ​Rule​ ​26.3.5​ ​of​ ​the​ ​2015​ ​Implementing​ ​Rules and Regulations of the SRC (the “SRC-IRR") as follows:​ ​“​An​​investment​​contract​​means​​a​​contract,​​transaction​​or​​scheme​​whereby​ ​a​ ​person​ ​invests​ ​his​ ​money​ ​in​ ​a​ ​common​ ​enterprise​ ​and​ ​is​ ​led​​to​​expect​ ​profits​​primarily​​from​​the​​efforts​​of​​others​.​​It​​is​​presumed​​to​​exist​​whenever​​a​ ​person seeks to use the money or property of others on the promise of profits.​ ​A​ ​common​ ​enterprise​ ​is​ ​deemed​ ​created​ ​when​​two​​(2)​​or​​more​​investors​ ​“pool”​ ​their​ ​resources,​ ​creating​ ​a​ ​common​ ​enterprise​,​​even​​if​​the​​promoter​ ​receives nothing more than a broker’s commission.” (Emphasis supplied)​ ​In​​the​​case​​of​​SEC​​v.​​Howey​​Co.​,​​the​​US​​Supreme​​Court​​defined​​an​​investment​​contract​​as​​a​​contract​​or​ ​scheme​​for​​the​​placing​​of​​capital​​or​​laying​​out​​of​​money​​in​​a​​way​​intended​​to​​secure​​income​​or​​profit​ ​from​ ​its​ ​employment.​​1​ ​Investment​ ​contracts​ ​have​ ​been​ ​used​ ​and​ ​adopted​ ​in​ ​various​ ​situations​ ​where​​individuals​​were​​led​​to​​invest​​money​​in​​a​​common​​enterprise​​with​​the​​expectation​​that​​they​ ​would​​earn​​a​​profit​​through​​the​​efforts​​of​​the​​promoter​​or​​of​​someone​​other​​than​​themselves.​​2​ ​It​​is​​in​ ​the​​context​​of​​the​​foregoing​​that​​the​​U.S.​​Supreme​​Court​​came​​up​​with,​​and​​adopted​​the​​Howey​​Test​​3​ ​in​ ​determining​ ​if​ ​an​ ​investment​ ​scheme,​ ​regardless​ ​of​ ​the​​legal​​terminology​​used,​​partakes​​of​​the​ ​nature of an investment contract.​ ​Our​ ​Supreme​​Court​​thereafter​​adopted​​and​​consistently​​applied​​the​​Howey​​Test​​in​​determining​​if​​a​ ​transaction​ ​or​ ​a​ ​scheme​ ​is​ ​a​ ​security​ ​in​ ​the​ ​form​​of​​an​​investment​​contract,​​which​​requires​​prior​ ​registration from the Commission. The case of​​Virata​​v. Ng Wee​​4​ ​emphasized this, to wit:​ ​“​In​​this​​jurisdiction,​​the​​Court​​employs​​the​​Howey​​test​,​​named​​after​​the​​landmark​ ​case​ ​of​ ​Securities​ ​and​ ​Exchange​ ​Commission​ ​v.​ ​W.J.​ ​Howey​ ​Co.,​ ​to​ ​determine​ ​1​ ​328 U.S. 293 (1946).​ ​2​ ​Ibid.​​Although​​the​​definition​​as​​stated​​in​​the​​Howey​​Case​​qualified​​that​​the​​earning​​of​​profit​​was​​expected​​to​​be​​solely​​through​​the​ ​efforts​ ​of​ ​another​ ​party,​ ​Rule​ ​26.3​ ​of​ ​the​ ​2015​ ​IRR​ ​of​ ​the​ ​SRC​ ​replaced​ ​the​ ​qualifier​ ​with​ ​“primarily”​,​ ​acknowledging​ ​that​ ​an​ ​investment​​contract​​may​​still​​be​​present​​where​​the​​individual​​who​​placed​​the​​money​​exerted​​a​​small​​amount​​of​​effort​​in​​an​​attempt​ ​to earn the profits.​ ​3​ ​Ibid.​ ​4​ ​G.R. Nos. 220926, 221058, 221109, 221135 & 221218, July 5, 2017.​

​In the Matter of:​​NXORA.PH​ ​EIPD​​Order No.​​2026-0012​ ​CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER​ ​Page​​3​​of​​7​ ​x----------------------------------------------------------------------x​ ​whether​​or​​not​​the​​security​​being​​offered​​takes​​the​​form​​of​​an​​investment​​contract.​ ​The case served as the foundation for the domestic definition of the said security​.​ ​Under​ ​the​ ​Howey​ ​test,​ ​the​ ​following​ ​must​ ​concur​ ​for​ ​an​ ​investment​ ​contract​​to​​exist:​​(1)​​a​​contract,​​transaction,​​or​​scheme;​​(2)​​an​​investment​ ​of​​money;​​(3)​​investment​​is​​made​​in​​a​​common​​enterprise;​​(4)​​expectation​ ​of​ ​profits;​ ​and​ ​(5)​ ​profits​ ​arising​ ​primarily​ ​from​ ​the​ ​efforts​ ​of​ ​others.​ ​Indubitably,​ ​all​ ​of​ ​the​ ​elements​ ​are​ ​present​ ​in​ ​the​ ​extant​ ​case.”​ ​(Emphasis​ ​supplied)​ ​Moreover,​​in​​the​​case​​of​​Power​​Homes​​Unlimited​​Corp.​​v.​​Securities​​and​​Exchange​​Commission​​5​ ​the​ ​Supreme​​Court​​ruled​​that​​in​​applying​​the​​Howey​​Test,​​the​​nature​​and​​the​​entirety​​of​​the​​transaction​ ​should be considered, consistent with the broad concept of “securities” in our jurisdiction, thus:​ ​“It​​behooves​​us​​to​​trace​​the​​history​​of​​the​​concept​​of​​an​​investment​​contract​​under​ ​R.A.​ ​No.​ ​8799​.​ ​Our​​definition​​of​​an​​investment​​contract​​traces​​its​​roots​​from​​the​ ​1946​​United​​States​​(US)​​case​​of​​SEC​​v.​​W.J.​​Howey​​Co.​ ​In​​this​​case,​​the​​US​​Supreme​ ​Court​​was​​confronted​​with​​the​​issue​​of​​whether​​the​​Howey​​transaction​​constituted​ ​an​​"investment​​contract"​​under​​the​​Securities​​Act's​​definition​​of​​"security."​ ​The​​US​ ​Supreme​ ​Court,​ ​recognizing​ ​that​ ​the​ ​term​ ​"investment​​contract"​​was​​not​​defined​ ​by​​the​​Act​​or​​illumined​​by​​any​​legislative​​report,​​held​​that​​"Congress​​was​​using​​a​ ​term​ ​whose​ ​meaning​ ​had​ ​been​​crystallized"​​under​​the​​state's​​"blue​​sky"​​laws​​in​ ​existence​​prior​​to​​the​​adoption​​of​​the​​Securities​​Act.​​Thus,​​it​​ruled​​that​​the​​use​​of​ ​the​​catch-all​​term​​"investment​​contract"​​indicated​​a​​congressional​​intent​​to​​cover​ ​a​ ​wide​ ​range​ ​of​ ​investment​ ​transactions.​ ​It​ ​established​ ​a​ ​test​ ​to​ ​determine​ ​whether​​a​​transaction​​falls​​within​​the​​scope​​of​​an​​"investment​​contract."​​Known​​as​ ​the​ ​Howey​ ​Test,​ ​it​ ​requires​​a​​transaction,​​contract,​​or​​scheme​​whereby​​a​​person​ ​(1)​ ​makes​ ​an​ ​investment​ ​of​ ​money,​ ​(2)​ ​in​ ​a​ ​common​ ​enterprise,​ ​(3)​ ​with​ ​the​ ​expectation​ ​of​ ​profits,​ ​(4)​ ​to​ ​be​ ​derived​ ​solely​ ​from​ ​the​ ​efforts​ ​of​ ​others.​ ​Although​​the​​proponents​​must​​establish​​all​​four​​elements,​​the​​US​​Supreme​ ​Court​​stressed​​that​​the​​Howey​​Test​​"embodies​​a​​flexible​​rather​​than​​a​​static​ ​principle,​ ​one​ ​that​ ​is​ ​capable​ ​of​ ​adaptation​ ​to​ ​meet​ ​the​ ​countless​ ​and​ ​variable​​schemes​​devised​​by​​those​​who​​seek​​the​​use​​of​​the​​money​​of​​others​ ​on​​the​​promise​​of​​profits.​"​ ​Needless​​to​​state,​​any​​investment​​contract​​covered​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Howey​ ​Test​ ​must​ ​be​ ​registered​ ​under​ ​the​ ​Securities​ ​Act,​ ​regardless​ ​of​ ​whether its issuer was engaged in fraudulent practices.” (Emphasis ours)​ ​Applying​​the​​foregoing​​parameters​​established​​in​​jurisprudence,​​the​​EIPD​​finds​​reasonable​​grounds​ ​to​​believe​​that​​the​​investment​​scheme​​of​​“NXORA.PH”​,​​where​​investments​​received​​from​​the​​public​ ​earns​ ​guaranteed​ ​profits​ ​constitutes​ ​an​ ​offer/sale​ ​of​ ​unregistered​ ​securities​ ​in​ ​the​ ​form​ ​of​ ​an​ ​Investment Contract as all the elements of the Howey Test are present, to wit:​ ​First​,​ ​there​ ​is​ ​an​ ​investment​ ​of​ ​money​ ​by​ ​the​ ​public​ ​in​ ​the​ ​investment​ ​scheme​ ​of​ ​“NXORA.PH​” who were enticed to invest in their scheme;​ ​Second​,​​there​​is​​a​​common​​enterprise​​in​​the​​sense​​that​​the​​investors​​monies​​were​​pooled​​in​ ​respondent​​“NXORA.PH”​​investment scheme;​ ​Third​,​ ​there​ ​was​ ​clearly​ ​an​ ​expectation​ ​of​ ​profits​ ​on​ ​the​ ​part​ ​of​ ​its​ ​investors​ ​who​ ​were​ ​promised that their money would earn guaranteed returns;​ ​Fourth​,​​the​​profits​​are​​derived​​primarily​​from​​the​​efforts​​of​​others.​​Here​​the​​investors​​had​ ​no​​hand​​in​​the​​management​​of​​“NXORA.PH”​​and​​earned​​profits​​by​​merely​​investing​​in​​said​ ​entity.​ ​5​ ​G.R. No. 164182, February 26, 2008.​

​In the Matter of:​​NXORA.PH​ ​EIPD​​Order No.​​2026-0012​ ​CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER​ ​Page​​4​​of​​7​ ​x----------------------------------------------------------------------x​ ​Furthermore,​ ​the​ ​act​ ​of​ ​“NXORA.PH”​ ​in​ ​carrying​ ​out​ ​its​​unauthorized​​investment-taking​​activities​ ​through​​social​​media,​​promoting​​its​​unauthorized​​investment​​schemes​​constitute​​as​​public​​offering​ ​as defined under Rule 3.1.17 of the 2015 SRC IRR, to wit:​ ​“3.1.17.​ ​Public​ ​offering​ ​is​ ​any​ ​offering​ ​of​ ​securities​ ​to​ ​the​ ​public​ ​or​ ​to​ ​anyone,​ ​whether​ ​solicited​ ​or​ ​unsolicited.​ ​Any​ ​solicitation​ ​or​ ​presentation​ ​of​ ​securities​​for​​sale​​through​​any​​of​​the​​following​​modes​​shall​​be​​presumed​​to​​be​​a​ ​public offering:​ ​x x x​ ​3.1.17.2 Presentation in any​​public​​or commercial​​place​;​ ​3.1.17.3​ ​Advertisement​ ​or​ ​announcement​ ​in​ ​radio,​ ​television,​ ​telephone,​ ​electronic​​communications,​​information​​communication​​technology​​or​​any​ ​other forms of communication​;” (Emphasis supplied)​ ​Section​​8.1​​of​​the​​SRC​​categorically​​provides​​that​​securities​​cannot​​be​​sold​​or​​offered​​for​​sale​​within​ ​the​ ​Philippines​ ​if​ ​the​ ​same​ ​are​ ​not​ ​registered​ ​with​ ​the​ ​Commission​ ​in​ ​the​ ​form​ ​of​ ​an​ ​approved​ ​Registration Statement and a Permit to Offer/Sell issued in favor of the applicant, to wit:​ ​“​SEC.​​8.​​Requirement​​of​​Registration​​of​​Securities.​​–​​8.1​​Securities​​shall​​not​ ​be​​sold​​or​​offered​​for​​sale​​or​​distribution​​within​​the​​Philippines,​​without​​a​ ​registration​ ​statement​ ​duly​ ​filed​ ​with​ ​and​ ​approved​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Commission​.​ ​Prior​ ​such​ ​sale,​ ​information​ ​on​ ​the​ ​securities,​ ​in​ ​such​ ​form​ ​and​ ​with​ ​such​ ​substance​ ​as​ ​the​ ​Commission​ ​may​ ​prescribe,​ ​shall​ ​be​ ​made​ ​available​ ​to​ ​each​ ​prospective purchaser.”​​(Emphasis supplied)​ ​In​ ​the​ ​instant​ ​case,​ ​the​ ​Certifications​ ​issued​ ​by​ ​the​ ​MSRD,​ ​CGFD,​ ​and​ ​CRMD​ ​all​ ​confirm​ ​that​ ​“​NXORA.PH​”​ ​through​ ​their​ ​Leaders​ ​and/or​ ​agents​ ​have​ ​no​ ​license​ ​to​ ​sell,​ ​offer,​ ​or​ ​deal​ ​with​ ​securities;​​neither​​have​​they​​caused​​the​​registration​​of​​the​​securities​​that​​they​​are​​currently​​offering​ ​or​ ​selling.​ ​Accordingly,​ ​the​ ​offer​ ​and​ ​sale​ ​of​ ​unregistered​ ​securities​ ​in​ ​the​ ​form​ ​of​ ​investment​ ​contracts,​​without​​the​​requisite​​license,​​constitute​​a​​clear​​and​​continuing​​violation​​of​​Sections​​8,​​26​ ​and​​28​​of​​the​​SRC.​​These​​circumstances​​warrant​​the​​immediate​​issuance​​of​​a​​Cease​​and​​Desist​​Order​ ​in order to protect the investing public.​ ​Furthermore,​ ​NXORA.PH​ ​appears​ ​to​ ​present​ ​itself​ ​as​ ​a​ ​next-generation​ ​trading​ ​and​ ​investment​ ​platform​​that​​claims​​to​​utilize​​major​​brokerage​​platforms​​to​​assist​​investors​​in​​growing​​their​​capital​ ​through​ ​secure​ ​trading.​ ​Such​ ​representations​ ​suggest​ ​that​ ​the​ ​platform​ ​facilitates,​ ​or​ ​purports​ ​to​ ​facilitate,​​online​​trading-related​​transactions​​and​​operates​​a​​digital​​environment​​through​​which​​such​ ​activities​ ​are​ ​conducted.​ ​These​ ​activities​ ​may​ ​constitute​ ​the​ ​provision​ ​of​ ​crypto-asset​ ​services​ ​and/or​ ​the​ ​operation​ ​of​ ​a​ ​crypto-asset​ ​trading​ ​venue,​ ​subject​ ​to​ ​the​ ​applicable​ ​laws,​ ​rules,​ ​and​ ​regulations enforced by the Commission.​ ​Relative​​to​​the​​issuance​​of​​a​​CDO,​​Section​​64.1​​of​​the SRC provides​​that​​the​​Commission​​may​​issue​​a​ ​CDO​​without​​the​​need​​for​​a​​prior​​hearing,​​when​​by​​its​​judgment,​​the​​act​​or​​practice​​will​​operate​​as​​a​ ​fraud​ ​upon​ ​investors​ ​or​ ​is​ ​otherwise likely​ ​to​ ​cause​​grave​​or​​irreparable​​injury or​​prejudice​​to​​the​ ​investing public, thus:​ ​“​Section​ ​64.​​Cease​ ​and​ ​Desist​ ​Order.​—​ ​64.1. ​The​ ​Commission,​after​ ​proper​ ​investigation​ ​or​ ​verification,​motu​ ​proprio ​or​ ​upon​ ​verified​ ​complaint​ ​by​ ​any​ ​aggrieved​​party, ​may​​issue​​a​​cease​​and​​desist​​order​​without​​the​​necessity​​of​ ​a​​prior​​hearing​​if​​in​​its​​judgment​​the​​act​​or​​practice,​​unless​​restrained,​​will​ ​operate​ ​as​ ​a​ ​fraud​ ​on​ ​investors​ ​or​ ​is​ ​otherwise​ ​likely​ ​to​ ​cause​ ​grave​ ​or​ ​irreparable injury or prejudice to the investing public​.”​​(Emphasis supplied)​ ​Corollarily,​​pursuant​​to​​Section​​50,​​in​​relation​​to​​Section​​55,​​Rule​​XI​​of​​the​​2026​​Rules​​of​​Procedure​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Securities​ ​and​ ​Exchange​ ​Commission,​ ​the​ ​Commission,​ ​through​ ​its​​Operating​​Departments,​

​In the Matter of:​​NXORA.PH​ ​EIPD​​Order No.​​2026-0012​ ​CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER​ ​Page​​5​​of​​7​ ​x----------------------------------------------------------------------x​ ​may​ ​issue​ ​a​ ​Cease​ ​and​ ​Desist​ ​Order,​ ​motu​ ​proprio​ ​or​ ​upon​ ​a​ ​verified​ ​complaint,​ ​without​ ​the​ ​necessity​​of​​a​​prior​​hearing,​​whenever​​there​​is​​reasonable​​basis​​to​​believe​​that​​a​​person​​has​​engaged​ ​or​ ​is​ ​about​ ​to​ ​engage​ ​in​ ​any​ ​act​ ​or​ ​practice​ ​which,​ ​unless​ ​restrained,​ ​will​ ​operate​ ​as​ ​a​ ​fraud​ ​on​ ​investors or will likely cause grave or irreparable injury or prejudice to the investing public, to wit:​ ​“Section​ ​50.​ ​How​ ​Commenced​.​ ​An​ ​Operating​ ​Department,​ ​Extension​ ​Office​ ​or​ ​SHP,​​motu​​proprio​​or​​upon​​a​​complaint,​​may​​issue​​a​​CDO​​without​​the​​necessity​​of​ ​a​ ​prior​ ​hearing,​ ​upon​ ​a​ ​finding​ ​that​ ​the​ ​grounds​ ​for​ ​the​ ​issuance​ ​of​ ​the​ ​CDO​ ​provided​​under​​Sections​​53.3​​and​​64​​of​​the​​SRC,​​Section​​156​​of​​the​​RCC,​​or​​Section​ ​6(d)(4) of the FCPA are present.​ ​xxx​ ​Section​ ​55.​ ​Grounds​ ​for​ ​a​ ​CDO​ ​under​ ​the​ ​SRC​.​ ​Whenever​ ​the​ ​Operating​ ​Department,​​Extension​​Office​​or​​SHP,​​motu​​proprio​​or​​upon​​a​​verified​​complaint,​ ​has​​reasonable​​basis​​to​​believe​​that​​a​​person​​has​​engaged​​or​​is​​about​​to​​engage​​in​ ​any​​act​​or​​practice​​which,​​unless​​restrained,​​will​​operate​​as​​a​​fraud​​on​​investors,​ ​or​​will​​likely​​cause​​grave​​or​​irreparable​​injury​​or​​prejudice​​to​​the​​investing​​public,​ ​it may issue a CDO without the necessity of a prior hearing.​ ​A​​CDO​​issued​​under​​this​​Section​​shall​​contain​​a​​directive​​to​​the​​person/s​​against​ ​whom it is issued to submit a verified Motion to Lift the CDO within five (5) days.”​ ​The​ ​Supreme​ ​Court,​ ​in​ ​Primanila​ ​Plans,​ ​Inc.​ ​v.​​Securities​​and​​Exchange​​Commission​​6​​,​​emphasized​ ​that​​it​​is​​the​​duty​​of​​the​​Commission​​to​​promptly​​issue​​a​​cease​​and​​desist​​order​​whenever​​necessary​ ​to​​immediately​​stop​​acts​​that​​may​​cause​​fraud,​​grave​​injury,​​or​​irreparable​​prejudice​​to​​investors​​and​ ​the investing public, to​​wit:​ ​“The​​law​​is​​clear​​on​​the​​point​​that​​a​​cease​​and​​desist​​order​​may​​be​​issued​​by​​the​ ​SEC​ ​motu​ ​proprio​,​ ​it​ ​being​​unnecessary​​that​​it​​results​​from​​a​​verified​​complaint​ ​from​ ​an​ ​aggrieved​ ​party.​ ​A​ ​prior​ ​hearing​ ​is​​also​​not​​required​​whenever​​the​ ​Commission​​finds​​it​​appropriate​​to​​issue​​a​​cease​​and​​desist​​order​​that​​aims​ ​to​ ​curtail​ ​fraud​ ​or​ ​grave​ ​or​ ​irreparable​ ​injury​ ​to​​investors.​​There​​is​​good​ ​reason​ ​for​ ​this​ ​provision,​ ​as​ ​any​ ​delay​ ​in​ ​the​ ​restraint​ ​of​ ​acts​ ​that​ ​yield​ ​such​ ​results​​can​​only​​generate​​further​​injury​​to​​the​​public​​that​​the​​SEC​​is​ ​obliged to protect.”​​(Emphasis supplied)​ ​The​​unauthorized​​investment​​scheme​​of​​“​NXORA.PH​”​​likewise​​constitutes​​financial​​fraud​​as​​defined​ ​under​​the​​Republic​​Act.​​No.​​11765​​of​​the​​Financial​​Products​​and​​Services​​Consumer​​Protection​​Act​ ​(FCPA),​​which​​provide​​that​​any​​form​​of​​deceptive​​solicitation​​of​​investments​​from​​the​​public,​​which​ ​includes​​Ponzi​​schemes​​and​​such​​other​​schemes​​involving​​the​​promise​​or​​offer​​of​​profits​​or​​returns​ ​sourced​​from​​the​​investments​​or​​contributions​​made​​by​​the​​investors​​themselves,​​and​​the​​offering​​or​ ​selling​ ​of​ ​investment​ ​schemes​ ​to​ ​the​ ​public​ ​without​ ​a​ ​license,​ ​Considering​ ​that​ ​financial​​fraud​​is​ ​punishable​​under​​the​​FCPA,​​any​​act​​constituting​​the​​same​​should​​immediately​​be​​cease​​and​​desist​​by​ ​the Commission for the protection of the investing public.​ ​The​ ​EIPD​ ​finds​ ​that​ ​the​ ​act​ ​of​ ​“​NXORA.PH”​ ​through​ ​their​ ​Leaders​ ​and/or​ ​its​ ​Agents​ ​in​ ​selling/offering​​unregistered​​securities​​operates​​as​​a​​fraud​​to​​the​​public​​which,​​if​​unrestrained,​​will​ ​likely cause grave injury or prejudice to the investing public.​​7​ ​Further,​ ​unless​ ​restrained,​ ​the​ ​act​ ​of​ ​“​NXORA.PH”​ ​through​ ​their​ ​Leaders​ ​and/or​ ​its​ ​Agents​ ​in​ ​selling/offering​ ​unregistered​ ​securities​ ​constitutes​ ​a​ ​continuing​ ​violation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​provisions​​of​​the​ ​SRC and the FCPA.​ ​6​ ​G.R. No. 193791, August 6, 2014​ ​7​ ​Section 64 of the Securities Regulation Code.​

​In the Matter of:​​NXORA.PH​ ​EIPD​​Order No.​​2026-0012​ ​CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER​ ​Page​​6​​of​​7​ ​x----------------------------------------------------------------------x​ ​In​​SEC​​vs.​​CJH​​Development​​Corporation​​(G.R.​​No.​​210316,​​28​​November​​2016),​​the​​Supreme​​Court​ ​ruled​​that​​the​​act​​of​​selling​​unregistered​​securities​​without​​the​​requisite​​license​​necessarily​​operates​ ​as a fraud on investors, thus:​ ​“​The​​law​​is​​clear​​on​​the​​point​​that​​a​​cease​​and​​desist​​order​​may​​be​​issued​ ​by​ ​the​ ​SEC​ ​motu​ ​proprio​,​ ​it​ ​being​ ​unnecessary​ ​that​ ​it​ ​results​ ​from​ ​a​ ​verified​ ​complaint​ ​from​ ​an​ ​aggrieved​ ​party.​ ​A​ ​prior​ ​hearing​ ​is​ ​also​ ​not​ ​required​ ​whenever​ ​the​ ​Commission​​finds​​it​​appropriate​​to​​issue​​a​​cease​​and​​desist​ ​order​​that​​aims​​to​​curtail​​fraud​​or​​grave​​or​​irreparable​​injury​​to​​investors.​ ​There​​is​​good​​reason​​for​​this​​provision,​​as​​any​​delay​​in​​the​​restraint​​of​​acts​ ​that​ ​yield​ ​such​​results​​can​​only​​generate​​further​​injury​​to​​the​​public​​that​ ​the SEC is obliged to protect​.​ ​The​ ​act​ ​of​ ​selling​ ​unregistered​ ​securities​ ​would​ ​necessarily​ ​operate​ ​as​ ​a​ ​fraud​ ​on​​investors​​as​​it​​deceives​​the​​investing​​public​​by​​making​​it​​appear​ ​that​ ​respondents​ ​have​ ​authority​ ​to​ ​deal​ ​on​​such​​securities​.​ ​Section​​8.1​​of​ ​the​ ​SRC​ ​clearly​ ​states​ ​that​ ​securities​ ​shall​ ​not​ ​be​ ​sold​ ​or​ ​offered​ ​for​ ​sale​ ​or​ ​distribution​ ​within​ ​the​ ​Philippines​ ​without​ ​a​ ​registration​ ​statement​ ​duly​ ​filed​ ​with​ ​and​ ​approved​ ​by​ ​the​ ​SEC​ ​and​ ​that​ ​prior​ ​to​ ​such​ ​sale,​ ​information​ ​on​ ​the​ ​securities,​​in​​such​​form​​and​​with​​such​​substance​​as​​the​​SEC​​may​​prescribe,​​shall​ ​be made available to each prospective buyer.” (Emphasis supplied)​ ​WHEREFORE​,​​premises​​considered,​​“NXORA.PH”,​​through​​their​​Leaders​​and/or​​its​​Agents​​and​​their​ ​respective​ ​officers,​ ​directors,​ ​representatives,​ ​salesmen,​ ​agents,​ ​brokers,​ ​dealers,​ ​promoters,​ ​recruiters,​ ​uplines,​​influencers,​​endorsers,​​abettors,​​and​​enablers​​and​​any​​and​​all​​persons​​claiming​ ​and/or​​acting​​for​​and​​in​​their​​behalf,​​are​​hereby​​ordered​​to​​IMMEDIATELY​​CEASE​​AND​​DESIST​​from​ ​further​​engaging​​in​​activities​​of​​selling​​and/or​​offering​​for​​sale​​of​​unregistered​​securities​​in​​the​​form​ ​of​ ​investment​ ​contracts​ ​and/or​ ​other​ ​activities/transaction​ ​relative​ ​thereto,​ ​until​ ​the​ ​requisite​ ​registration​​and​​registration​​statements​​are​​duly​​filed​​with​​and​​approved​​by​​the​​Commission,​​and​​the​ ​corresponding license and/or permit to offer/sell securities are issued.​ ​“NXORA.PH”,​ ​its​ ​leaders,​ ​agents,​ ​officers,​ ​operators,​ ​administrators,​ ​promoters,​ ​representatives,​ ​salesmen,​ ​agents,​ ​investment​ ​team​ ​planners,​ ​mentors,​ ​enablers,​ ​influencers,​ ​assigns,​ ​conduit​ ​entities,​ ​subsidiaries,​ ​and​ ​any​ ​and​ ​all​ ​persons​ ​claiming​ ​and/or​ ​acting​ ​for​ ​and​ ​in​ ​their​ ​behalf​ ​are​ ​likewise​ ​directed​ ​to​ ​immediately​ ​CEASE​ ​their​ ​internet​ ​presence​ ​relating​ ​to​ ​the​ ​transactions​ ​and​ ​investment scheme covered by this​​Cease and Desist​​Order.​ ​Finally,​ ​“NXORA.PH”,​ ​its​ ​leaders,​ ​agents,​ ​and​ ​their​ ​respective​ ​officers,​ ​operators,​ ​administrators,​ ​promoters,​ ​representatives,​ ​salesmen,​ ​agents,​ ​investment​ ​team​ ​planners,​ ​mentors,​ ​enablers,​ ​influencers,​ ​assigns,​ ​conduit​​entities,​​subsidiaries,​​and​​any​​and​​all​​persons​​claiming​​and/or​​acting​ ​for​​and​​in​​their​​behalf​​are​​PROHIBITED​​from​​transacting​​any​​and​​all​​business​​involving​​funds​​in​​its​ ​depository​​banks,​​and​​from​​transferring,​​disposing,​​or​​conveying​​in​​any​​manner,​​any​​and​​all​​assets,​ ​properties,​​real​​or​​personal,​​including​​bank​​deposits,​​if​​any,​​of​​which​​the​​named​​persons​​herein​​may​ ​have​​interest,​​claim​​or​​participation,​​whether​​directly​​or​​indirectly,​​under​​their​​custody,​​immediately​ ​to​​forestall​​grave​​damage​​and​​prejudice​​to​​all​​concerned​​and​​to​​ensure​​the​​preservation​​of​​the​ ​assets​ ​for the benefit of the investors without authority from the Commission.​ ​The​ ​issuance​ ​of​ ​this​ ​Cease​ ​&​ ​Desist​ ​Order​ ​is​ ​without​ ​prejudice​ ​to​ ​the​ ​commencement​ ​by​ ​Commission​ ​through​ ​the​ ​EIPD,​ ​of​ ​the​ ​appropriate​ ​administrative​ ​and​ ​criminal​ ​action​ ​against​ ​the​ ​owners,​​operators,​​officers,​​representatives,​​of​​“NXORA.PH”​,​​and​​any​​persons​​or​​entities​​found​​to​​act​ ​as​​solicitors,​​information​​providers,​​salesmen,​​agents,​​brokers,​​dealers​​or​​the​​like​​for​​and​​in​​behalf​ ​of​​“NXORA.PH”​.​ ​Let​ ​a​ ​copy​ ​of​ ​this​ ​Order​ ​be​ ​furnished​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Company​ ​Registration​ ​and​ ​Monitoring​ ​Department​ ​(CRMD),​​Markets​​and​​Securities​​Regulation​​Department​​(MSRD)​​,​​Corporate​​Governance​​and​​Finance​ ​Department​ ​(CGFD)​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Information​ ​and​ ​Communications​ ​Technology​ ​Department​ ​(ICTD)​ ​of​ ​this​​Commission,​​the​​Bangko​​Sentral​​ng​​Pilipinas​​(BSP),​​the​​Department​​of​​Trade​​and​​Industry​​(DTI),​ ​the​ ​National​ ​Privacy​ ​Commission​ ​(NPC),​ ​the​ ​Department​ ​of​ ​Information​ ​and​ ​Communications​

​In the Matter of:​​NXORA.PH​ ​EIPD​​Order No.​​2026-0012​ ​CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER​ ​Page​​7​​of​​7​ ​x----------------------------------------------------------------------x​ ​Technology​ ​(DICT),​ ​and​ ​the​ ​relevant​ ​local​ ​government​ ​unit(s)​ ​(LGUs)​ ​for​ ​their​ ​information​ ​and​ ​appropriate action.​ ​Further,​​let​​a​​copy​​of​​this​​Order​​be​​published​​on​​the​​official​​website​​of​​the​​Commission​​for​​general​ ​circulation.​ ​In​​accordance​​with​​Section​​64.3​​of​​the​​SRC​​and​​Rule​​XI​​of​​the​​2026​​Rules​​of​​Procedure​​of​​the​​SEC,​​the​ ​Respondent​ ​may​ ​file​​a​​verified​​Motion​​to​​Lift​​the​​CDO​​with​​the​​EIPD​​within​​five​​(5)​​days​​from​ ​receipt​ ​of​ ​this​ ​Order​ ​or​ ​the​ ​posting​ ​of​ ​the​ ​same​ ​on​ ​the​​Commission’s​​website​​whichever​​is​ ​earlier.​ ​FAIL NOT UNDER PENALTY OF LAW.​​ ​SO ORDERED.​ Digitally signed by Lupango- Tamayo Sheara Laurio Date: 2026.10.01 22:35:59 +08'00' ​SHEARA L. LUPANGO-TAMAYO​ ​Officer-in-Charge, Enforcement and Investor​ ​ rotection Department (S.O. No. 117, s. 2026)​ P