The U.S. Department of Labor Administrative Review Board (“ARB”) extended the potential reach of SOX whistleblower coverage to private companies whose subsidiaries are partially owned by a publicly traded company. It also confirmed that reports to external auditors and concerns raised through an employee’s ordinary job duties may constitute protected activity. Gloss v. Tata Chemicals North America, ARB No. 2024-0006
Proskauer Whistleblower Defense
Blog Authors
Latest from Proskauer Whistleblower Defense
Cal. Federal Court Grants Employer Summary Judgment Despite Protected Whistleblowing
A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granting summary judgment in favor of an employer despite evidence of protected whistleblowing is instructive. Han v. Pfizer (No. 23-cv-039080-AMO).
Background
The plaintiff, a compliance analytics employee, alleged that his former employer, a pharmaceutical company, retaliated against him after he internally reported suspected illegal activity and…
SOX Whistleblower Claim Survives Summary Judgment Despite No Explicit Allegation of Fraud
On April 17, 2026, in Potyondy v. Pacific Coast Energy Co. (No. 2:24-CV-09151), the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California denied an employer’s motion for summary judgment on a SOX whistleblower claim—even though the plaintiff admitted he never explicitly reported “fraud.” The court found there to be triable issues of fact where the alleged protected activity consisted…
Court Narrowly Interprets Whistleblower Protections Under AMLA and FIRREA
On September 23, 2025, in Park v. Shinhan Bank America, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed whistleblower retaliation claims brought by four former compliance officers of Shinhan Bank America (“SHBA”) pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). No. 22-CV-10331 (VSB). The claims arose under the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 (“AMLA”) and the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery,…
Colorado Federal Court Dismisses SOX and Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Claims, Emphasizing Administrative Prerequisites
On September 17, 2025, in Prkic v. Sezzle, Inc., the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado dismissed whistleblower retaliation claims under both the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX”) and the Dodd-Frank Act (“Dodd-Frank”) where the plaintiff failed to: (i) submit her SOX claim to OSHA; and, (ii) provide information to the SEC during her employment. No. 24-cv-02624. The plaintiff’s claims…
DC District Court Dismisses SOX Whistleblower Retaliation Claim Where Plaintiff Was Employed Abroad And His Employment Contract Was Not Governed By U.S. Law
In Jefferson v. Science Apps. Int’l Corp., et al.,[1] the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the plaintiff’s whistleblower retaliation claim brought under Section 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX” or the “Act”), holding, in line with courts across the country, that the statute does not apply extraterritorially and that there can be no domestic application…
Washington Federal Court Refuses to Dismiss SOX Whistleblower Claim Despite Plaintiff Working Abroad
On March 25, 2025, in Smith v. Coupang,[1] the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington denied Coupang, Inc.’s motion to dismiss its former employee’s SOX and state law whistleblower claims despite the plaintiff working in South Korea for a South Korean subsidiary of a U.S.-based publicly traded company.
Background
Plaintiff is a U.S. citizen who…
Former Executive Secures $34.5 Million Settlement in Whistleblower Retaliation Case
On March 20, 2025, in Zornoza v. Terraform Global Inc. et al, No. 818-cv-02523 (D. Md. Apr. 4, 2025), a former executive of two SunEdison subsidiaries secured a $34.5 million settlement over his SOX whistleblower retaliation claims.
Background
Carlos Domenech Zornoza (the “Executive”), the former President and CEO of two SunEdison subsidiaries, filed a whistleblower retaliation complaint with the…
Third Circuit Refuses to Enforce Preliminary Reinstatement Order Issued By OSHA
On October 15, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Third Circuit declined to enforce a preliminary reinstatement order issued by OSHA in favor of two purported whistleblowers under SOX, holding that the former employees lost Article III standing after they abandoned the administrative process to instead challenge their terminations though a separate civil action in federal court. Gulden v.
SEC Announces Slew of Enforcement Actions Regarding Whistleblower Protection Rule
The SEC recently announced the settlement of multiple enforcement actions for violations of its whistleblower protection rule, which prohibits “any action to impede an individual from communicating directly with the Commission staff about a possible securities law violation.” SEC Rule 21F-17(a). These settlements resulted in the targeted companies paying fines exceeding $3 million in the aggregate.
As we have previously…