Back Before the Fifth Circuit: DOJ Appeals Another FCPA Acquittal
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.
Supreme Court’s First Choice Decision May Expand Federal Court Options to Recipients of State Attorney General CIDs
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.
Tariff Enforcement at the Forefront: Importer Agrees to Pay $549.5 million in Largest-Ever Trade-Related False Claims Act Settlement
On May 12, 2026, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced a $549.5 million settlement with Perfectus Aluminum Acquisitions LLC and four affiliated companies to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act (“FCA”) by evading customs duties. This settlement is the largest trade-related settlement under the FCA.
The action was initiated by qui tam cases brought by individuals who worked for U.S.-based competitors and the Aluminum Extrusion Counsel and ultimately coordinated through the DOJ’s Trade Fraud Task Force, which involved cooperation between DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security. This case highlights the increasing use of the FCA to hold importers liable for the underpayment of customs duties, the Administration’s commitment to enforcing U.S. customs laws, and the potential for competitors and former employees to harness the FCA to motivate federal investigations into allegations of trade fraud.
This post examines the settlement and discusses its implications for importers, manufacturers, and other companies facing customs and trade enforcement risk.
Three Potential Benefits, One Powerful Incentive: NDIL’s New Individual Self-Disclosure Program
On May 14, 2026, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois (NDIL) announced a new Individual Self-Disclosure Program offering qualifying individuals three potential forms of relief in exchange for voluntary self-disclosure and cooperation: letter immunity, a deferred or non-prosecution agreement, or criminal prosecution with substantial sentencing relief. The Program’s express three-tier structure distinguishes it from many other federal self-disclosure programs, which generally focus on the possibility of a non-prosecution or deferred prosecution agreement. To qualify, individuals must provide a complete and truthful proffer, cooperate fully with law enforcement, testify if required, and disgorge any criminal proceeds, among other requirements. This post summarizes the Program’s key features and highlights how it compares to similar self-disclosure initiatives adopted in other jurisdictions.
“Don’t Wait”: DOJ Criminal Division Chief Signals Faster Disclosure Expectations and Uptick in Corporate Enforcement
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.
The First Prediction Market Insider Trading Case: SDNY and CFTC Test the Limits of Fraud and Commodities Law
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.
DOJ’s FOCUS Initiative: An Invitation or a Warning to Data Miner Relators?
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.
New Division Continues Time-Tested Model: DOJ’s National Fraud Enforcement Division Launches West Coast Health Care Fraud Strike Force
In another signal that health care fraud enforcement remains a top priority for DOJ, on April 30, 2026, the newly created National Fraud Enforcement Division (the “Fraud Division”) announced the launch of the West Coast Health Care Fraud Strike Force, a multi-district initiative targeting health care fraud across the District of Arizona, the District of Nevada, and the Northern District of California. This expansion is consistent with the time-tested model of Main Justice-based health care matters that has existed since 2007. Like its predecessor strike forces, the West Coast Strike Force will use dedicated agent and prosecutorial resources in the region to combat schemes identified based on data analytics and traditional law enforcement techniques. This announcement is independently notable because it makes clear that while the Health Care Fraud Unit—rebranded as the Health Care Section of the new Fraud Division—is no longer part of the Criminal Division, it will continue with the same career leadership and approach to enforcement: use of data to expand prosecutorial pipelines, solicitation of whistleblowers, and aggressive pursuit of corporate and individual prosecutions.
