UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

 LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 15984 / November 20, 1998

 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zappa International  Corporation, Scott L. Simpson, Scott B. Walker, Equity Management  Services, Eagle Vision Holdings Inc., Wayne Nattrass, and  Westminster Trading Trust, Civil Action No. 98-CV-213-B (USDC  Wyo.)

 The Commission announced today that it obtained a  preliminary injunction against defendants Eagle Vision Holdings  Inc., Wayne L. Nattrass, both located in the Seattle, Washington  area, and Westminster Trading Trust, located in Richmond, Texas,  prohibiting the fraudulent sale of interests in prime bank  instrument trading programs which falsely offered guaranteed  returns exceeding 200 percent per month, claimed to be sponsored  by the Federal Reserve Bank and the International Monetary Fund,  and were represented to be guaranteed against risk of loss by the  top twenty-five world banks. The preliminary injunction,  entered November 18 1998 by Judge Clarence A. Brimmer (D.C.  Wyoming), included an order freezing the assets of the defendants  and requiring the repatriation of assets.

 The Court had previously issued a preliminary injunction and  asset freeze against defendants Scott B. Walker and Equity  Management Services, both of Afton, Wyoming, and Scott L. Simpson  and Zappa International Corporation, located in Richmond, Texas.  The amended complaint alleges that from September 1996 to the  present, the defendants raised approximately $15 million from at  least 100 investors through a fraudulent prime bank scheme in  which they guaranteed high rate of return and falsely represented  that the investors' principal was fully secured by a top European  Bank and that the programs were implemented through traders  licensed by either the International Monetary Fund or the Federal  Reserve Bank. The Commission alleges that the prime bank  instruments offered by the defendants do not exist. The  Commission alleged that the defendants failed to disclose the use  of investor funds to pay solicitation fees to others who referred  the investor and to make "Ponzi" payments to earlier investors  who sought the return of their investment. The Commission  alleged that through their false and misleading statements, the  defendants violated the anti-fraud provisions of Section 17(a) of  the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities  and Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.