Whistleblower
Advocates
Award Winning Attorneys
The truth is, of the 7,000 or so submissions the SEC receives each year, the lion’s share never even make it to an investigative team. (Sidebar: our submissions usually do.) Nearly half of those denials didn’t make the cut because the submissions didn’t follow the program rules.
This keeps us awake at night.
| Date | Description | Denial Justification | Key Docs |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4/16/2021 | Claimant's application for an award was based on his/her authorship of an "online publication of information" that the SEC found it initially received "by happenstance." Accordingly, it was deemed that program rules were not followed and no award was made. |
|
|
| 4/15/2021 | In an Order providing a joint award to other Claimants, the SEC upheld the recommendation of its Claims Review Staff to deny an award to a Claimant whose information was never provided to investigative staff. The Order also notes another denial with no reason specified for a Claimant who did not appeal. |
|
|
| 4/09/2021 | According to the SEC's Order, the information submitted by Claimant/applicant "was duplicative . . . and did not include any materially new details." |
|
|
| 4/07/2021 | Claimant's award application was denied because his/her information was never provided to or used by SEC staff in the investigation or resulting Covered Action. |
|
|
| 4/07/2021 | Denying award to a pair of joint Claimants and a third Claimant because their information was never provided to or used by SEC staff in the investigation or resulting Covered Action. |
|
|
| 4/02/2021 | The SEC was already aware of Claimant's information, which was not provided voluntarily. |
|
|
| 3/17/2021 | Claimant did not voluntarily report and thus was ineligible for a whistleblower award. The SEC or another regulatory authority had previously made a request, inquiry or demand into the subject matter. |
|
|
| 3/04/2021 | Ten (10) Claimants were denied an award. Eight of them did not appeal. The tips from the remaining two Claimants only concerned conduct by competitors of the relevant company, and did not contribute to the Covered Action. |
|
|
| 2/19/2021 | Claimant, in his/her multiple award applications, fatally did not refer to a Covered Action brought by the SEC. It appears Claimant’s tips concerned conduct that was the subject of enforcement action by other federal agencies only. |
|
|
| 2/19/2021 | The SEC did not specify a reason for its denial of this Claimant's application. It merely noted the denial and Claimant’s non-appeal, in an Order providing an award to a different Claimant. |
|