On September 17, 2010, the SEC instituted Cease-and-Desist Proceedings against Daxor Corporation. According to the SEC: "Daxor, a public company, claims to be a medical device manufacturing company, but it is, and has been for many years, an investment company as defined by Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Investment Company Act.... Daxor is not exempted or excluded from the requirements of Investment Company Act. Yet it has never registered with the Commission as an investment company, in violation of Section 7(a) of the Act."

On February 24, 2011, Administrative Law Judge Robert G. Mahony issued an Order Denying Motion for Oral Deposition.

On February 24, 2011, the administrative law judge denied the motion made by the defendants to depose Dr. Timothy Manzone, a witness for the cease-and-desist proceedings. The administrative law judge determined that the deposition was not necessary as the company had not met the burden of showing the witness could not appear at a oral hearing.

On July 7, 2011, the SEC granted a request from the administrative law judge for an extension of time to issue an initial decision in the proceeding.

On August 31, 2011, an administrative law judge held that the SEC had "established that Daxor constitutes an investment company, under Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the Act, because it is in the business of investing and more than 40% of its assets comprise investment securities." As such, Daxor "is in violation of Section 7(a) of the Act, and shall be ordered to register under Section 8 of the Act." Daxor's argued that it was not an investment company because of its focus on medical products, but the ALJ was unpersuaded by this argument because the test for determining designation of investment companies does not depend on the intentions of the company, only its actions and assets.

On September 30, 2011, the administrative law judge in the Matter of Daxor Corporation issued an order correcting an error of fact in his initial decision that was issued in August of 2011. The fact to be corrected was the investment expense for the corporation and the percentage of total expenses it represented. Both parties agreed to the change and the motion to amend was granted.

On February 10, 2012, the SEC granted Daxor Corporation's request to dismiss Daxor's petition for review of the administrative law judge's initial decision that Daxor "was operating as an unregistered investment company in violation of Section 7(a) of the [Investment Company] Act." The Commission also dismissed its own review of the sanctions imposed in the matter.