
Robert A. Marsico
Partner
201-896-7165 rmarsico@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Robert A. Marsico
Date: January 10, 2018

Partner
201-896-7165 rmarsico@sh-law.comThe Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently released its annual whistleblower report. The report comes as the U.S. Supreme Court is set to decide who is protected as a whistleblower under the Dodd-Frank Act in Digital Realty Trust v. Somers.

The SEC’s whistleblower program, which was first launched in 2011, provides a monetary incentive to corporate insiders and others with relevant information concerning potential securities violations to report their information to the Commission. Those who provide high-quality, original information that results in an SEC enforcement action with sanctions exceeding $1 million are eligible for awards ranging from 10 percent to 30 percent of the money collected by the agency.
Since the beginning of the program, wrongdoers in enforcement matters involving whistleblower information have been ordered by the SEC to pay over $975 million in total monetary sanctions, including more than $671 million in disgorgement of ill-gotten gains and interest. The SEC’s 2017 whistleblower report reveals several interesting trends that can help businesses improve their securities compliance strategies. Below is a brief summary:
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision will help shape the future of the SEC’s whistleblower program. The specific question before the Court in is whether Dodd-Frank’s anti-retaliation provision for “whistleblowers” extends to individuals who have not reported alleged misconduct to the SEC.
As more fully detailed in a prior article, the SEC’s implementing rule provides protection from retaliation to workers who make protected disclosures regardless of whether they report the information to the SEC or another source. However, the federal courts of appeal have divided regarding whether a whistleblower must complain directly to the SEC in order to qualify as a whistleblower and benefit from the law’s anti-retaliation protections.
The Court heard oral arguments on November 28, although a final decision may not be issued until next June. We will continue to track the case, so stay tuned for updates.
If you have any questions or if you would you like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Robert Marsico, at 201-806-3364.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!