Robin M. Bergen

Subscribe to Robin M. Bergen's Posts
Contact:Read more about Robin M. Bergen

On December 26, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated the previous grant of a stay of the injunction enjoining enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) and beneficial ownership reporting rule.  As a result, the nationwide preliminary injunction originally granted by the district court is once again in effect pending consideration of the DOJ’s appeal by the Fifth Circuit’s merits panel.Continue Reading Fifth Circuit Reinstates CTA Injunction Pending Oral Arguments in March; FinCEN January 13 Deadline on Hold

In our prior notes of December 4, 9, and 13, 2024, we reported that (1) a district court in Texas issued a nationwide injunction halting implementation of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), (2) the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) acknowledged that companies need not file CTA mandated disclosures while that injunction remained in effect. Subsequently, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) moved to stay the injunction pending appeal. The district court rejected that motion, but on December 23, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted the government’s motion, staying the district court’s injunction and expediting briefing of the appeal. In so doing, the Court concluded that the government had “made a strong showing that it is likely to succeed on the merits in defending CTA’s constitutionality.” In addition, the Court rejected the plaintiffs’ warnings that “lifting the . . . injunction days before the compliance deadline would place an undue burden on them,” reasoning that the plaintiffs filed suit only months ago and the injunction had been in place mere weeks, whereas businesses have had “nearly four years . . . to prepare since Congress enacted the CTA, as well as the year since FinCEN announced the reporting deadline.”Continue Reading Fifth Circuit Pauses District Court CTA Injunction; FinCEN Extends Filing Deadline to January 13, 2025

As outlined in our prior update, on December 3, 2024, a Texas federal district court issued a preliminary injunction that temporarily blocks the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) and its implementing regulations from taking effect nationwide. Continue Reading DOJ Appeals CTA Injunction; FinCEN Suspends Filing Requirement

We want to make you aware that yesterday, a Texas federal district court issued a nationwide preliminary injunction temporarily blocking the effectiveness of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) and its implementing regulations, which require certain companies (including certain non-U.S. companies registered to conduct business in the United States) to disclose beneficial ownership information to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), a bureau of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.Continue Reading Federal District Court Enjoins Enforcement of U.S. Corporate Transparency Act

On November 22, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced its enforcement results for the 2024 fiscal year with a record $8.2 billion in financial remedies.[1]  At the same time, a few cases and sweeps comprised the vast bulk of that amount, and the number of cases brought dropped by 26%.  In a press release announcing the results, Acting Enforcement Director Sanjay Wadhwa touted the agency’s “high impact enforcement actions” and noted “stepped up efforts” by market participants to self-report their own potential wrongdoing, cooperate in SEC investigations, and remediate any shortcomings.  Chair Gary Gensler, who recently announced he will step down at the start of the next Trump presidency, described the Enforcement Division as a “steadfast cop on the beat.”  Set forth below are key highlights on enforcement trends from the past year, as well as predictions for what the next year may hold under a new administration.Continue Reading SEC FY 2024 Enforcement Results: Record Dollars But Many Fewer Cases

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Division of Examinations (the “Division”) released its 2025 examination priorities on October 21, 2024 (the “2025 Priorities”).  The 2025 Priorities highlight a wide range of topics for entities subject to SEC examinations, particularly investment advisers and broker-dealers.  The topics should be very familiar, as they largely continue recent focus areas for not only the Examinations Division but also the Enforcement Division.Continue Reading SEC 2025 Exam Priorities: Private Funds, Cyber, Crypto, and New Rule Compliance

Last week brought Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) enforcement developments that, in our view, demonstrate the SEC’s interest in pursuing cases against investment advisers for conduct that would have been restricted under the Private Fund Adviser Rules (“PFAR”) and that the SEC stated in the PFAR adopting release was inconsistent with advisers’ fiduciary obligations.  As expected – and as previewed in our Client Alert on the Fifth Circuit’s decision in June – the SEC clearly still intends to act on the same concerns it raised in PFAR and will use its examination and enforcement tools to scrutinize the same adviser practices that drove the rulemaking.Continue Reading SEC Enforcement Updates – Post-PFAR Developments

Earlier this month, the California State Budget released for approval by the state legislature included an updated version of Senate Bill 54 (the “VC Diversity Law”).  The latest version contains several updates to the VC Diversity Law, including revisions to the definition of “covered entity;” that said, as we discuss below, it is not clear that the scope of coverage will meaningfully differ.  The updates also delay the initial reporting date to March 1, 2026 (from the original date of March 1, 2025), and reflect a change to the California governmental division responsible for enforcing the law.Continue Reading California Updates Diversity Reporting Law for Venture Capital Funds to Start in 2026

What’s next after PFAR? In its highly-awaited June 5th opinion, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated all of the SEC’s Private Fund Adviser rules (“PFAR”), agreeing with industry trade associations that the SEC lacked the necessary statutory authority to adopt PFAR. In our latest Client Alert, we examine the opinion, aspects of…

With its decision in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Keener (May 29, 2024), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has now twice in the span of four months affirmed a broad interpretation of who is considered a “dealer” for purposes of the securities laws. More specifically, the Eleventh Circuit upheld the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) position that a person engaged in the business of purchasing—for its own account—convertible debt notes from microcap issuers (also referred to as “penny-stock” companies), converting the notes into common stock, and selling that stock in the market meets the definition of a “dealer” under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), and must therefore be registered as a dealer with the SEC. The decision in Keener closely tracked the same Court’s decision in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Almagarby, Microcap Equity Group (February 14, 2024), in which the Eleventh Circuit agreed with the SEC that the plaintiff Almagarby had been acting as an unregistered “dealer” in violation of the Exchange Act by obtaining convertible debt of microcap companies for his own account, converting the debt into common stock, and then selling the stock. Continue Reading Keener, Almagarby, and the Scope of the “Dealer” Definition: Potential Implications for Fund Managers and other Investors