Economic sanctions and anti-money laundering (“AML”) remain at the forefront of U.S. regulatory priorities. Indeed, in 2017, federal and state agencies imposed over $2.5 billion in penalties for sanctions/AML violations. And, despite its generally deregulatory agenda, the Trump administration has taken a rigorous approach in this area, particularly with respect to sanctions. At the state level, the New York Department of Financial Services (“DFS”) continues to take aggressive action on both the regulatory and enforcement fronts. This memorandum surveys major developments and trends in 2017 and provides an outlook for the year ahead. We also provide some practical advice for … Read more
On April 19, 2017, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) released its “Lessons Learned Review of Supervision of Sales Practices at Wells Fargo.”[i] The report results from Comptroller Thomas Curry’s directive for an “independent review” of the Wells Fargo supervisory record to “identify any supervision gaps and lessons learned to improve the OCC’s supervisory processes going forward.”
The OCC report mirrors some of the themes of the Wells Fargo investigation report, which we have discussed in a prior memorandum.[ii] According to the OCC report, examiners missed opportunities to probe more deeply into sales practices problems, search for … Read more
In SEC v. Graham, 2014 WL 1891418 (S.D. Fla. May 12, 2014) (King, J.), a Florida district court held that SEC claims for injunctive relief, declaratory relief and disgorgement are subject to the same five-year statute of limitations as claims for civil monetary penalties. The court’s reasoning was based, in large part, on the Supreme Court’s analysis of that statute of limitations last year in Gabelli v. SEC, 133 S. Ct. 1216 (2013).
28 U.S.C. § 2462 (“Section 2462”) provides that “[e]xcept as otherwise provided by Act of Congress, an action, suit or proceeding for the enforcement … Read more
In In re Facebook, Inc., IPO Securities & Derivative Litigation, 2014 WL 1760332 (S.D.N.Y. May 2, 2014), the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York rejected the argument that underwriters and selling stockholders in an IPO should be treated as a “group” for the purposes of the short-swing profit rule as a result of “lock-up” agreements temporarily prohibiting shareholders from selling their shares without underwriter permission. The court rejected plaintiff’s theory that the lock-up agreements required the underwriters and shareholders to be treated as a group—which would subject underwriters to short-swing profit liability—because plaintiff did not … Read more