On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Enforcement 2018: Perspectives from Government Agencies

Released on: May. 16, 2018
Running Time: 06:20:56

In addition to the credits listed to the right, this program also offers credit for ABA professional certification. Enforcement 2018: Perspectives from Government Agencies has been approved for 7.5 CAFP, 7.5 CRCM credits. This statement should not be viewed as an endorsement of this program or its sponsor.

The new administration will continue to bring unprecedented changes in our economic, business and regulatory regimes in general, and in enforcement efforts in particular. This unique program brings together panels of senior staff from the various enforcement and regulatory agencies including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, U.S. Attorney’s Office, U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FBI, FINRA, and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Moderated by law firm enforcement practitioners, the panels will discuss agency priorities, how the agencies are working together, and offer best practices for working with the government in today’s continually changing enforcement environment. Those who represent, as in-house or outside counsel, businesses and individuals that need to comply with financial regulatory requirements, businesses and individuals that are working hard to avoid regulatory and enforcement scrutiny, and businesses and individuals that, for whatever reason, find themselves under regulatory and enforcement scrutiny will benefit from this timely program.

Lecture Topics [Total time 06:20:56]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.

  • Opening Remarks* [00:06:11]
    Richard D. Owens, Linda Chatman Thomsen, Joan E. McKown
  • Enforcement Priorities [01:18:13]
    Claudius B. Modesti, James McDonald, Sandra L. Moser, Steven R. Peikin, Katherine R. Goldstein, Jason Cowley
  • Swaps and Derivatives and Market Enforcement: Trends and Lessons from the Past [01:00:39]
    Geoffrey F. Aronow, Daniel Michael, Benjamin Singer, Gretchen L. Lowe, Larry R. Parkinson
  • The Cybersecurity Landscape: Working with Law Enforcement [00:57:43]
    Avi Gesser, Robert A. Cohen, Richard T. Jacobs, Kristen Anderson, Clark P. Russell
  • Retail Investors: The New Enforcement Frontier? [01:00:36]
    Leslie R. Caldwell, Jessica B. Hopper, Charu Chandrasekhar, Alixandra Smith, Jeff Ehrlich
  • Legal and Policy Developments in Enforcement [00:59:02]
    Mark D. Cahn, Jason Cowley, J. Gordon Seymour, Michael A. Conley
  • Ethical Issues that Arise When Working with Government Agencies [00:58:32]
    Thomas M. Noone, Scott Schools, Jeff Rosenblum, Barbara B. Hannigan, Carmen J. Lawrence

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:

  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  •  Colleen P. Mahoney, Charles F. Walker, Erich T. Schwartz, Andrew M. Lawrence, Joshua A. Ellis, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP & Affiliates, Trends in SEC Enforcement & Internal Investigations (March 2, 2018)
    Colleen P. Mahoney
  • Is the CFTC Becoming the National Fraud Police? The CFTC Goes All In On Policing Fraud In Virtual Currencies, Futures & Derivatives Law Report: The Journal on the Law of Investment & Risk Management Products, Volume 38, Issue 3 (March 2018)
    Geoffrey F. Aronow
  • In Re: UBS AG, S.E.C. Release No. 9961, File No. 3-16891 (Oct. 13, 2015)
    Daniel Michael
  • In Re: Coinflip, Inc., d/b/a Derivabit, and Riordan, CFTC Docket No. 15-29 (Sept. 17, 2015)
    Geoffrey F. Aronow
  • In Re: TeraExchange LLC, CFTC Docket No. 15-33 (Sept. 24, 2015)
    Geoffrey F. Aronow
  • In Re: BFXNA INC. d/b/a BITFINEX, CFTC Docket No. 16-19 (June 2, 2016)
    Geoffrey F. Aronow
  • In Re: FORCERANK LLC, S.E.C. Release Nos. 10232; 79093; File No. 3-17625 (2016)
    Daniel Michael
  • In re: Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, S.E.C. Release No. 79606; File No. 3-17737 (2016)
    Daniel Michael
  • Complaint for Injunctive and Other Equitable Relief and for Civil Monetary Penalties under the Commodity Exchange Act and Commission Regulations, Jury Trial Demanded, CFTC v. Gelfman Blueprint, Inc. and Gelfman, Case No. 17-7181 (S.D.N.Y. 2017)
    Geoffrey F. Aronow
  • Complaint for Injunctive and Other Equitable Relief and for Civil Monetary Penalties under the Commodity Exchange Act and Commission Regulations, Jury Trial Demanded, CFTC v. My Big Coin Pay, Inc., Crater, and Gillespie (D. Mass. Jan. 16, 2018)
    Geoffrey F. Aronow
  • Complaint for Injunctive and Other Equitable Relief and for Civil Monetary Penalties under the Commodity Exchange Act and Commission Regulations, Jury Trial Demanded, CFTC v. McDonnell and Cabbagetech, Corp. d/b/a Coin Drop Markets, Case No. 18-CV-0361 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2018)
    Geoffrey F. Aronow
  • CFTC v. McDonnell and Cabbagetech, Corp. d/b/a Coin Drop Markets, Case No. 18-CV-0361 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 6, 2018)
    Geoffrey F. Aronow
  • Complaint for Injunctive and Other Equitable Relief, Restitution, and Civil Monetary Penalties under the Commodity Exchange Act, CFTC v. Dean and the Entrepreneurs Headquarters Limited, Case No. 18-cv-00345 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2018)
    Geoffrey F. Aronow
  • U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Office of Public Affairs, CFTC Backgrounder on Oversight of and Approach to Virtual Currency Futures Markets (January 4, 2018)
    Geoffrey F. Aronow
  • Cybersecurity Requirements for Financial Services Companies, 23 NYCRR 500 (2017)
    Avi Gesser
  • A Framework for a Vulnerability Disclosure Program for Online Systems, U.S. Department of Justice, Cybersecurity Unit (July 2017)
    Avi Gesser
  • Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, Cyber Breach Center, OCC Says Cyber Threats Continue to Elevate Banks’ Operational Risk (January 23, 2018)
    Avi Gesser
  • Avi Gesser and Gabriel D. Rosenberg, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, Cyber Breach Center, Delegation, Not Abdication: The CFTC Fines AMP Global Clearing LLC for Failing to Supervise a Third-Party Service Provider (February 21, 2018)
    Avi Gesser
  • U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, Press Release, Attorney General Sessions Announces New Cybersecurity Take Force (February 20, 2018)
    Avi Gesser
  • U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Commission Statement and Guidance on Public Company Cybersecurity Disclosures, Release Nos. 33-10459; 34-82746, 17 CFR Parts 229 and 249 (February 21, 2018)
    Avi Gesser
  • Randal K. Quarles, Vice Chairman for Supervision, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Brief Thoughts on the Financial Regulatory System and Cybersecurity, Remarks Before the Financial Services Roundtable, 2018 Spring Conference, Washington, D.C. (February 26, 2018)
    Avi Gesser
  • Chairman Jay Clayton, Public Comments from Retail Investors and Other Interested Parties on Standards of Conduct for Investment Advisers and Broker-Dealers (June 1, 2017)
  • U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Press Release, SEC Announces Enforcement Initiatives to Combat Cyber-Based Threats and Protect Retail Investors (September 25, 2017)
  • Stephanie Avakian, Co-Director, Division of Enforcement, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Speech, The SEC Enforcement Division’s Initiatives Regarding Retail Investor Protection and Cybersecurity (October 26, 2017)
  • Legal and Policy Developments in Enforcement: Discussion Topics (Substantive Outline) (March 2018)
    Mark D. Cahn
  • Selected Ethics Topics and Developments (March 12, 2018)
    Dixie L. Johnson
  • King & Spalding, Client Alert, Special Matters & Government Investigations and Tax Practice Groups, Reflections on Kokesh v. SEC: On the Lookout for “Elephants in Mouseholes” (February 9, 2018)
    Dixie L. Johnson
  • Dixie L. Johnson, Carmen Lawrence, Alec Koch, Peter Isajiw, Victoria Bohannan, Business Law Today, Don’t Blow It: Avoiding Pitfalls under the SEC’s Whistleblower Regime (November 1, 2017)
    Dixie L. Johnson
Co-Chair(s)
Joan E. McKown ~ Jones Day
Richard D. Owens ~ Latham & Watkins LLP
Linda Chatman Thomsen ~ Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Speaker(s)
Kristen Anderson ~ Attorney, Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, Federal Trade Commission
Geoffrey F. Aronow ~ Sidley Austin LLP
Mark D. Cahn ~ Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
Leslie R. Caldwell ~ Latham & Watkins LLP
Charu Chandrasekhar ~ Chief, Retail Strategy Task Force, Division of Enforcement, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Robert A. Cohen ~ Chief, Cyber Unit, Division of Enforcement, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Michael A. Conley ~ Solicitor, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Jason Cowley ~ Co-Chief, Securities and Commodities Fraud Task Force, United States Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York
Jeff Ehrlich ~ Deputy Enforcement Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)
Avi Gesser ~ Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Katherine R. Goldstein ~ Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
Barbara B. Hannigan ~ Ethics Officer and Senior Compliance Counsel, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
Jessica B. Hopper ~ Enforcement Deputy Chief, Senior Vice President, Regional Enforcement, FINRA
Richard T. Jacobs ~ Cyber Branch, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Carmen J. Lawrence ~ King & Spalding
Gretchen L. Lowe ~ Chief Counsel, Division of Enforcement, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission
James M. McDonald ~ Director, Division of Enforcement, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Daniel Michael ~ Chief, Complex Financial Instruments Unit, Division of Enforcement, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Claudius B. Modesti ~ Director, Division of Enforcement and Investigations, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
Sandra L. Moser ~ Acting Chief, Fraud Section, U.S. Department of Justice
Thomas M. Noone ~ Counsel and Assistant Vice President, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Larry R. Parkinson ~ Director, Office of Enforcement, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Steven R. Peikin ~ Co-Director, Division of Enforcement, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Jeff Rosenblum ~ Deputy General Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Clark P. Russell ~ AAG (Deputy Bureau Chief), New York State Office of Attorney General
Scott Schools ~ Associate Deputy Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice
J. Gordon Seymour ~ General Counsel, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
Benjamin Singer ~ Chief, Securities & Financial Fraud Unit, U.S. Department of Justice
Alixandra Smith ~ Deputy Chief, Business and Securities Fraud Section, U.S. Attorney's Office, EDNY
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period. Effective January 1, 2019, the limit of distance education per reporting period will increase from 9 to 18 credits.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “video replay” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 video replay credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  All PLI products can fulfill Washington’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Alberta (CPD-ALBERTA):  All PLI products can fulfill Alberta’s CPD requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Dubai (CLPD-DUBAI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill CLPD credit requirements.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as the “QAS Self-Study” delivery method. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CFP credit.

 

Share
Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2018 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2018 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.