Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 MARCH 2015

Another SEC Whistleblower Amicus Brief On Whether Dodd-Frank Covers Internal Complaints

Proskauer Rose LLP
Proskauer Rose LLP
Contributor
Proskauer Rose LLP

Proskauer Rose LLP

Firm Overview Proskauer is an elite global law firm with more than 900 lawyers across key financial...

View firm profile
Explore more from Proskauer Rose LLP

On February 6, the SEC filed its third amicus brief defending its interpretive rule on Dodd-Frank’s anti-retaliation provision, 15 U.S.C. §78u-6(h)(1).

United StatesEmployment and HR

On February 6, the SEC filed its third amicus brief defending its interpretive rule on Dodd-Frank's anti-retaliation provision, 15 U.S.C. §78u-6(h)(1).  The impetus is a ruling out of the Southern District of New York in Berman v. Neo@Ogilvy, No. 14-cv-523, which follows the Fifth Circuit Asadi decision concluding that the Dodd-Frank anti-retaliation provision does not cover internal complaints.  The district court in Berman dismissed the plaintiff's lawsuit because he made only an internal report, and an appeal the Second Circuit ensued.

This amicus brief is substantially similar to the SEC briefs filed in Liu Meng-Lin v. Siemens AG (Second Circuit) and Safarian v. American DG Energy (Third Circuit), with one notable exception.  The SEC's most recent brief now argues that failing to defer to its interpretation could "arbitrarily and irrationally deny" whistleblowers protection who first report violations to the DOJ, FBI or other self-regulatory organizations (e.g.,

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from