Entries by Michael D. Mann

05 06 '26

New Clarity Emerges on DOJ’s Fraud Enforcement Reorganization

/in , , , , , , , , /by

In remarks delivered on June 3, 2026, at the American Conference Institute’s Global Anti-Corruption, Ethics & Compliance Conference in New York City, Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva, the head of the U.S. Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) Criminal Division, provided the clearest public indication to date of how DOJ intends to divide fraud enforcement responsibilities between the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the newly created National Fraud Enforcement Division (“NFED”).

Under the emerging structure, NFED will focus on government program fraud, i.e., criminal offenses involving public payers and public systems, including taxpayer-funded programs, while the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section will remain focused on private-sector market, consumer, and corporate fraud matters—a traditional strength of the Unit previously known as Market Integrity & Major Frauds, which will remain part of the Criminal Division. Duva further emphasized that the Fraud Section will be focusing on securities and major financial fraud schemes, global fraud, and prediction markets, and is actively looking to further build capacity by hiring talented lawyers.

The remarks largely confirm earlier expectations that DOJ would eventually provide greater clarity regarding the respective roles of the Criminal Division and NFED following NFED’s creation. We examine what Duva’s comments reveal about DOJ’s enforcement priorities, staffing changes, and the implications for future enforcement activity.

21 05 '26

Back Before the Fifth Circuit: DOJ Appeals Another FCPA Acquittal

/in , , , , , /by

On May 8, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice appealed Judge Kenneth Hoyt’s post-verdict acquittal in the FCPA prosecution of Ramón Alexandro Rovirosa Martínez, setting up what could become a significant Fifth Circuit decision on both double jeopardy and the use of translated foreign language evidence in federal criminal trials.

Although a Houston jury convicted Rovirosa in December 2025 on conspiracy and substantive FCPA charges tied to alleged bribery of officials at Mexico’s state-owned oil company, Pemex, Judge Hoyt later vacated the convictions, concluding that the Government’s reliance on certified English translations of Spanish language communications violated the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause because the translators themselves did not testify.

The appeal raises potentially consequential questions about whether post-verdict acquittals can be reviewed without violating double jeopardy protections, and whether certified translations of foreign language communications are “testimonial” statements requiring live confrontation. This blog post explores those issues and places the appeal in the broader context of the Fifth Circuit’s continuing scrutiny of major FCPA decisions.

20 05 '26

Supreme Court’s First Choice Decision May Expand Federal Court Options to Recipients of State Attorney General CIDs

/in , , , , , , , /by

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Davenport may create a new strategic consideration for recipients of state attorney general civil investigative demands (CIDs). In a unanimous opinion, the Court held that a nonprofit could pursue a Section 1983 challenge to a New Jersey Attorney General subpoena in federal court based on alleged First Amendment associational harms arising from compelled donor disclosure.

Although the Court emphasized the narrow nature of its holding, the decision potentially opens the door to federal court challenges where state attorney general CIDs implicate donor anonymity, expressive association, advocacy activities, or other constitutional interests. The ruling also reflects the Court’s continued willingness to recognize Article III standing based on alleged chilling effects tied to First Amendment rights.

Our latest post examines the decision, the arguments raised by a coalition of state attorneys general, and what the ruling may mean for companies, nonprofits, trade associations, and other recipients of state attorney general investigative demands.

12 05 '26

“Don’t Wait”: DOJ Criminal Division Chief Signals Faster Disclosure Expectations and Uptick in Corporate Enforcement

/in , , , , , , , /by

On May 7, 2026, Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva used his first major speech to the compliance community since DOJ’s March 2026 rollout of its department-wide Corporate Enforcement Policy (CEP) to deliver a clear message: corporate enforcement activity is expected to increase, companies should self-disclose misconduct early—even before completing internal investigations—and robust compliance programs remain central to DOJ’s expectations.

08 05 '26

The First Prediction Market Insider Trading Case: SDNY and CFTC Test the Limits of Fraud and Commodities Law

/in , , , , /by

On April 23, 2026, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (“SDNY”) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) announced parallel criminal and civil actions against a U.S. Army service member accused of using classified military information about a planned operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro to place profitable trades on Polymarket, a prediction market platform. The case, the first to apply traditional insider trading and fraud theories to prediction markets, signals a shift in how the government will regulate this emerging market.  In response to this news, companies should consider reviewing company policies on insider trading and compliance to address prediction markets and the use of confidential information in connection with event-based trading.

07 05 '26

DOJ’s FOCUS Initiative: An Invitation or a Warning to Data Miner Relators?

/in , , , /by

On April 30, 2026, the Department of Justice’s Civil Division announced the Fraud Oversight through Careful Use of Statistics, or FOCUS, initiative. The initiative is aimed at a fast-growing category of False Claims Act relators that exploded in the aftermath of the pandemic and the Paycheck Protection Program: “data miners” who analyze publicly available government data to identify potential fraud and then file qui tam complaints. DOJ’s message to these non-traditional relators is twofold. First, the Department seems to have accepted that data-miner relators are here to stay, and so has invited sophisticated, well-supported data analysis that can help identify fraud that might otherwise go undetected. But second, DOJ intends to prioritize data-miner relators who can demonstrate meaningful pre-filing diligence, analytical rigor, familiarity with the governing program rules, and legally sufficient allegations.

For companies in sectors with substantial government funding or reimbursement, including healthcare, life sciences, defense, education, technology, and other government contractors, the practical takeaway is straightforward. Companies should evaluate their own publicly available data with the same skepticism and sophistication that a relator, short seller, or agency analyst might apply. Leveraging enhanced analytics and AI to match and front-run potential data miner-driven qui tams will allow companies to quickly assess the likely source of government interest, and explain it.

22 04 '26

Evolving AML/CFT Expectations and Enforcement Priorities as FinCEN Releases FY 2025 Year in Review

/in , /by

On April 16, 2026, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) released its Year in Review for Fiscal Year 2025 (the “FY 2025 Report”). The report provides a concise overview of recent regulatory and enforcement developments in the financial crimes space and offers insight into FinCEN’s evolving priorities.

FinCEN highlights several key accomplishments over the past year, including reporting $10 billion in savings attributed to deregulatory efforts, enhancing the management and sharing of Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) data with law enforcement, and expanding engagement with private-sector stakeholders on anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (“AML/CFT”) issues.