United States: FERC Wins Statute Of Limitations Fight In Market Manipulation Enforcement Case, But Uncertainty Remains

On January 4, 2019, the United States District Court for the District of Maine handed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or "the Commission") a victory in FERC v. Silkman, a long-running market manipulation enforcement action against Competitive Energy Services (CES) and its managing member, Richard Silkman (the "Respondents") for allegedly engaging in manipulative conduct in connection with an ISO New England demand response program.  FERC and the Respondents each filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the Respondents' defense that FERC's claims are time-barred since FERC filed its district court enforcement action more than five years after the conduct occurred.  The court resolved the motions in FERC's favor, finding that the five-year statute of limitations only required FERC to initiate administrative proceedings against respondents within five years, with any subsequent district court enforcement action being subject to a separate limitations period beginning when the penalty is assessed administratively.  The court's decision is significant for the litigants because it allows FERC's enforcement case to proceed.  But, for reasons explained below, its effect beyond this litigation is uncertain and probably limited.

Brief Background on the Case

The Day-Ahead Load Response Program (DALRP) was a demand response program run by ISO New England until June 2012. In July 2012, FERC initiated Order to Show Cause (OSC) proceedings against four entities, including Respondents, alleged to have committed fraud in connection with the DALRP by altering "baseline" energy consumption during a test period for the purpose of misrepresenting the amount of demand response they would actually provide once the program started. All subjects elected the Federal Power Act's (FPA) "de novo review" procedural option, where FERC assesses penalties without an agency hearing and then files an action in federal district court to enforce the penalty, which the court reviews de novo. In August 2013, following the OSC proceedings, FERC assessed civil penalties against CES, Silkman, and one of the other subjects (the fourth settled with FERC during the OSC proceeding). In December 2013, after the subjects did not pay the assessed penalties, FERC filed enforcement actions in the District of Massachusetts. In April 2016, the court denied the subjects' motion to dismiss (including on statute of limitations grounds), but transferred to the case to the District of Maine.1 The third subject subsequently settled with FERC, but Respondents continued to litigate. In February 2018, Respondents and FERC filed cross-motions for partial summary judgment on Respondents' statute of limitations defense, which claimed that FERC's December 2013 enforcement action was untimely since it was filed more than five years after the alleged manipulation occurred (which began in 2007).

The January 4 Order

The court found that FERC's enforcement action against Respondents was timely even though it was filed in court more than five years after the conduct occurred. The court found the issue was governed by the First Circuit's decision in U.S. v. Meyer,2 which held that where an agency proceeding (there, a Department of Commerce (DOC) administrative enforcement proceeding) is a statutory prerequisite to a civil enforcement action, the civil enforcement claim does not "accrue" until the penalty has been assessed administratively. The result, under Meyer, is that there are two limitations periods—one five-year period to initiate administrative proceedings to assess the penalty, and another five-year period to enforce the penalty in court once it has been assessed. Thus, although FERC did not file its district court enforcement action against Respondents until December 2013 (well more than five years after the conduct began), the court found FERC's action was timely.

The court rejected Respondents' argument that Meyer was no longer good law following the Supreme Court's decisions in Gabelli v. SEC (which held that the "discovery rule" in fraud actions does not extend to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) enforcement actions) and Kokesh v. SEC (which held that disgorgement in SEC enforcement actions constitutes a penalty subject to the statute of limitations).3 The court found that neither of these cases addressed the specific statute of limitations questions presented in Meyer and Silkman: when the limitations period for an enforcement action begins to run when an administrative proceeding is a statutory prerequisite to bringing a case. The court also rejected Respondents' argument that Meyer did not apply because FERC's penalty assessment proceeding (the OSC process) is merely a "decision to prosecute" rather than a true administrative proceeding with procedures and due process comparable to the DOC proceeding in Meyer (which was a more traditional agency adjudication involving a hearing before an administrative law judge). The court found that the FERC OSC proceeding, despite not providing for discovery or a live hearing, was more than merely a prosecutorial determination such that the Meyer framework of two statute of limitations periods should apply.


FERC is still likely to move cases more quickly. This marks FERC's second consecutive win on statute of limitations challenges to enforcement actions—with the last case being the September 2018 decision in FERC v. Powhatan Energy Fund in the Eastern District of Virginia (discussed here).4 While one might think FERC would be emboldened by these wins, we continue to expect that FERC will try to bring cases more quickly to mitigate statute of limitations litigation risk. Courts within the First Circuit have found Meyer to provide a helpful (and binding) framework for considering FERC enforcement cases. However, courts elsewhere have (understandably) found statute of limitations questions confounding given the FPA's unique procedural framework. This was reflected in the Powhatan decision, where the court (reluctantly) agreed with FERC that its claim technically did not accrue until FERC had assessed the penalty administratively rather than at the time of the conduct, but took the unusual step of allowing defendants to seek an interlocutory appeal before the Fourth Circuit (and inviting Congress to provide clarity). Further, the Powhatan court, despite ruling in FERC's favor, found that Meyer should not govern FPA "de novo review" cases because of the differences between FERC's penalty assessment process and a traditional agency adjudication. The bottom line, in our view, is that the agency will continue to face real statute of limitations risk by not filing a federal complaint within five years of the conduct—particularly in jurisdictions that do not follow Meyer.

All eyes on the Fourth Circuit. As noted above, in the Powhatan case, the court ruled in FERC's favor on the statute of limitations question but allowed the defendants to seek an interlocutory appeal. The Fourth Circuit has agreed to hear the case, and briefing will begin later this month. This will be the first appellate decision on this issue.

Disgorgement likely a "penalty" for statute of limitations purposes. As we wrote about here, the Kokesh case—which held that disgorgement of unjust profits in SEC enforcement cases is subject to the five-year statute of limitations—should apply equally to FERC. In Powhatan, the court concluded that Kokesh would apply to disgorgement in FERC enforcement cases provided the disgorgement is punitive in nature rather than purely remedial. But the court found this question was fact-specific and could not be resolved at the motion to dismiss stage. The Silkman court, however, found the question more straightforward as a matter of law, holding that, under Kokesh, disgorgement in FERC enforcement cases constitutes a penalty and is subject to the five-year statute of limitations.


1 FERC v. Silkman, 177 F. Supp. 3d 683 (D. Mass. 2016) (Order on Mot. to Dismiss).  FERC v. Silkman, No. 13-13054-DPW, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48409 (D. Mass. April 11, 2016) (Order on Mot. to Transfer).

2 808 F.2d 912 (1st Cir. 1987).

3 See Gabelli v. SEC, 568 U.S. 442 (2013); Kokesh v. SEC, 137 S. Ct. 1635 (2017).

4 Order on Motions for Summary Judgment, FERC v. Silkman, No. 1:16-cv-00205-JAW (D. Me. Jan. 4, 2019).

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.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Sign Up
Gain free access to lawyers expertise from more than 250 countries.
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Newsalert
Select Topics
Select Regions
Registration (please 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.


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.


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