United States: A Review of Recent Whistleblower Developments - 17 April 2018

Whistleblower Developments is a periodic report covering significant cases, decisions, proposals, and legislation related to whistleblower statutes and how they may impact your business. Recent developments include:

  • Only Persons Who Report Security Violations to the SEC are Whistleblowers Under Dodd-Frank: Supreme Court Decides Digital Realty Case
  • Seventh Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Dodd-Frank Act Whistleblower Claim for Failure to Meet Act's "Whistleblower" Definition
  • Tenth Circuit Breathes New Life into Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Retaliation Case Eight Years After Employee's Termination
  • D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms the SEC's Denial of a Bounty Award
  • SEC's Office of the Whistleblower Announced its Largest-Ever Whistleblower Awards
  • SEC Awards More than $2.2 million to Whistleblower Who First Reported Information to Another Federal Agency Before Reporting to the SEC

Only Persons Who Report Security Violations to the SEC are Whistleblowers Under Dodd-Frank: Supreme Court Decides Digital Realty Case

In late February, the U.S. Supreme Court in Digital Realty Trust, which we have previously covered here and here, narrowed the definition of who qualifies as a "whistleblower" under the Dodd-Frank Act. Specifically, the Supreme Court ruled that, for purposes of the Dodd-Frank Act, only those individuals who have provided information about a securities law violation to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) qualify as "whistleblowers" who are protected under the Act. The Supreme Court's decision resolved a longstanding split between the Fifth and Ninth Circuits and, in so doing, established a bright-line rule for who may sue for relief under the Dodd-Frank Act's anti-retaliation provision and be entitled to its bounties.

The decision, authored by Justice Ginsburg and joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, rejected the SEC's proposed expansive definition of a whistleblower in favor of a narrower definition based only on a plain reading of the statute. The Supreme Court's opinion focused on the Dodd-Frank Act's specific wording as to who is a whistleblower. Specifically, the Supreme Court focused on the fact that the statutory definition only includes "an individual who provides...information relating to a violation of the securities laws to the Commission, in a manner established, by rule or regulation, by the Commission." (emphasis added). Thus, only an individual who reports potential securities law violations to the SEC before filing a lawsuit is protected by the Dodd-Frank Act's anti-retaliation provision. The Supreme Court found this reading of the statute to be consistent with the core purpose of the Dodd-Frank Act's whistleblower program; namely, "motivate[ing] people who know of securities law violations to tell the SEC."

The decision underscores the importance of implementing compliance programs and a culture that encourages employees to report internally to employers, rather than externally to the SEC.

Digital Realty Trust, Inc. v. Somers, ___ U.S. ___, No. 16-1276 (Feb. 21, 2018)

Seventh Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Dodd-Frank Act Whistleblower Claim for Failure to Meet Act's "Whistleblower" Definition

Last year, before the Supreme Court's decision in Digital Realty Trust, an Illinois federal district court dismissed a would-be whistleblower's case for failure to plead facts that established he qualified as a whistleblower under the Dodd-Frank Act. In that case, Martensen v. Chicago Stock Exchange, the district judge ruled that because the plaintiff alleged he reported his concerns of potential securities law violations internally to his employer, and not externally to the SEC, the plaintiff did not qualify as a "whistleblower" under the express definition of the term in the Dodd-Frank Act.

On February 20, 2018, the Seventh Circuit upheld the dismissal and rejected plaintiff's argument that he should have been afforded an opportunity to amend his dismissed complaint. The Seventh Circuit, which decided the appeal just before the Supreme Court's decision in Digital Realty Trust, did not reach the question of whether the plaintiff met the definition of a "whistleblower" under the Dodd-Frank Act. Instead, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of his lawsuit because plaintiff had conceded his report to the SEC was not the cause for his discharge. Instead, as the Seventh Circuit observed, the plaintiff alleged his termination was related to a later report made internally that did not concern fraud or any other violation of the securities laws, and which never reached the SEC. As such, the Seventh Circuit concluded that even if the district court had allowed the plaintiff to amend his complaint, that amendment would have been futile.

The case is Martensen v. Chicago Stock Exchange, No. 17-2660, decided on February 20, 2018.

Tenth Circuit Breathes New Life into Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Retaliation Case Eight Years After Employee's Termination

In 2010, a former executive of the pharmaceutical company Ceragenix claimed he was fired in retaliation for reporting securities law violations in two emails sent to the company's board of directors. The former executive also claimed the company's CEO defamed him in the wake of his termination. A federal district court in Colorado granted summary judgment against the former executive on both claims.

On February 22, 2018, however, the Tenth Circuit reversed the district court's decision, in part. The court decided plaintiff's Sarbanes-Oxley Act whistleblower retaliation claim could proceed, but his defamation claim could not. The Tenth Circuit's decision sets an important precedent, because it applied a broader standard of what constitutes Sarbanes-Oxley Act protected activity.

The district court applied the "definitive and specific" standard to the question of whether the former executive engaged in protected activity for purposes of protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act's whistleblower provisions. Under that standard, for the former executive to be protected under the Act, he would have had to specifically identify the securities law or rule he believed was being violated in his emails to the board of directors. The Tenth Circuit ruled the "definitive and specific" standard was obsolete and inapplicable, and instead applied the "reasonableness" standard to the former executive's claims. Under the "reasonableness" standard, a plaintiff need only show that he or she reasonably believes the conduct he or she complains of constitutes a violation of any or all of the securities laws listed in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Based on the application of this standard, the Tenth Circuit found summary judgment against the former executive was inappropriate and remanded the case for further proceedings.

The case is Genberg v. Porter, et al., No. 16-1368, decided on February 22, 2018.

D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms the SEC's Denial of a Bounty Award

On March 20, 2018, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued its judgment affirming the denial of an SEC bounty award to an unidentified individual who claims to have assisted with successful SEC enforcement actions. In January 2013, the unidentified individual ("John Doe") applied for a whistleblower award from the SEC in connection with an enforcement action against an investment company.

The Claims Review Staff for the SEC recommended denying Doe's whistleblower award application in part because, in the agency's view, the information Doe provided to the SEC did not "lead to" the enforcement action. Doe appealed that determination to the SEC, which denied his application, affirming the determination that his information did not "lead to" the SEC's enforcement action against the investment company. The SEC elaborated by stating that Doe was not entitled to a whistleblower award because the SEC employees who investigated and tried the enforcement action against the investment company either did not have access to the information Doe provided, or had access to that information but did not use it. Doe then appealed that determination to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

In its review of Doe's appeal, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the SEC's decision based on declarations from individuals who worked on the enforcement action against the investment company that affirmed they did not access or use any information that Doe provided. As such, Doe was not entitled to a whistleblower award.

SEC's Office of the Whistleblower Announced its Largest-Ever Whistleblower Awards

At the end of March, the SEC's Office of the Whistleblower announced the highest Dodd-Frank whistleblower awards in its history. Two whistleblowers shared a nearly $50 million award, and a third whistleblower separately received more than $33 million. The previous highest whistleblower award was for $30 million, made in 2014 to an individual living overseas. As is typical with the SEC's whistleblower award announcements, the agency did not publicize which enforcement action the whistleblower award recipients helped to bring.

Including these awards, the SEC has paid over $264 million to 54 whistleblowers to date. In its announcement regarding these most recent awards, the SEC emphasized that all payments made to whistleblowers through its program are made out of an investor protection fund established by Congress. That investor protection fund is financed entirely by monetary sanctions imposed on securities law violators, which are paid to the SEC.

SEC Awards More than $2.2 million to Whistleblower Who First Reported Information to Another Federal Agency Before Reporting to the SEC

On April 5, 2018, the SEC announced another whistleblower award of more than $2.2 million made to a former company insider whose information helped the agency start an investigation that led to a significant enforcement action. The whistleblower award recipient reportedly first disclosed that information to another federal agency before disclosing it directly to the SEC.

This is the first award the SEC has paid under the "safe harbor" of Exchange Act Rule 21F-4(b)(7). That "safe harbor" provision states that if a whistleblower submits information to another federal agency and submits the same information to the SEC within 120 days, the SEC will treat the information as though it had been submitted simultaneously to the SEC and to the other federal agency.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions