Whistleblower Receives Largest Award in SEC History
With the latest award, the SEC topped its previous record: a $39 million bounty issued in 2018.
June 04, 2020 at 02:01 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday issued the largest bounty in the decadelong history of its program for paying tipsters, awarding nearly $50 million to a whistleblower who was credited with providing "firsthand" information about corporate misconduct that led to an enforcement action.
"This award marks several milestones for the whistleblower program," Jane Norberg, chief of the SEC's whistleblower office, said. "This award is the largest individual whistleblower award announced by the SEC since the inception of the program, and brings the total awarded to whistleblowers by the SEC to over $500 million, including over $100 million in this fiscal year alone. Whistleblowers have proven to be a critical tool in the enforcement arsenal to combat fraud and protect investors."
With the latest award, the SEC topped its previous record: a $39 million bounty issued in 2018. The SEC has now awarded 13 separate tipsters in 2020. In the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, the SEC issued awards to eight tipsters, according to the whistleblower office's most recent report to Congress.
Under the SEC's whistleblower program, created by the Dodd-Frank reforms that followed the financial crisis, tipsters deemed worthy of awards are entitled to between 10% and 30% of the money collected in enforcement actions that result in more than $1 million in sanctions.
Following its standard practice, the SEC did not name the recipient of its latest award, nor did it identify the enforcement action that gave rise to the bounty. In the order approving the award, the SEC credited the whistleblower for providing firsthand observations of "misconduct by the company that was previously unknown to the staff."
In the course of the SEC's probe, the whistleblower "laid out in detail substantial aspects of the scheme and provided a road map for the investigation," the commission added, noting that the enforcement action helped return a significant amount of money to harmed investors.
The SEC order suggested that the whistleblower had assisted other federal agencies in bringing enforcement actions—and attempted to be rewarded for doing so. An SEC panel denied the whistleblower's claims in connection with those other agencies, finding that they were not sufficiently related to the commission's enforcement action. The SEC's order indicated that the whistleblower did not appeal that preliminary determination.
In the same order, the SEC rejected a second award applicant who claimed to have "jointly" tipped off the commission with the recipient of the nearly $50 million bounty. The SEC said repeatedly that there was "no evidence" that the second applicant assisted with the enforcement action and that the purported whistleblower missed the deadline for pursuing a bounty by 10 months.
The purported whistleblower claimed that the recipient of Thursday's whistleblower award had submitted an application on behalf of "both of them, as there was no space for them to both sign," the SEC said.
The SEC said there was "no evidence" that the second applicant participated "in any manner" with the other whistleblower's tip.
"Accordingly," the SEC said, the purported second tipster "does not qualify as a whistleblower and is thus not eligible to receive an award."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLitigators of the Week: After a 74-Day Trial, Shook Fends Off Claims From Artist’s Heirs Against UMB Bank
An ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
‘It's Your Funeral’: Avoiding Doing Damage to Your Client’s Case With Uncivil Behavior
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250