SEC Enforcement Defense

Investment Adviser Defense

Defense for registered investment advisers, fund managers, and broker-dealers in SEC and FINRA proceedings.

Overview

Registered investment advisers, fund managers, and broker-dealers operate under dense regulatory requirements administered by the SEC and FINRA. When violations are suspected (overbilling, undisclosed conflicts, fraudulent disclosures, or outright theft from client accounts), enforcement mechanisms are powerful and reputational stakes are immediate.

Alejandro Soto achieved a landmark precedent during his AUSA career: the first successful criminal prosecution in the Southern District of Florida of a registered investment adviser for a criminal violation of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. That experience, understanding how the government constructs criminal liability for investment advisers, directly informs how he defends investment advisers today.

Our Approach

Investment adviser enforcement defense requires detailed reconstruction of client relationships, disclosure documents, fee arrangements, and investment decision-making processes. We engage securities industry experts early to evaluate government theories against applicable regulatory standards and identify where conduct was consistent with industry practice.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the most common SEC enforcement theories against registered investment advisers?

The most common theories include: breach of fiduciary duty (undisclosed conflicts, failure to seek best execution, self-dealing); fraudulent billing (inflating fees, double-charging, charging for services not provided); misrepresentations in Form ADV disclosures; cherry-picking (allocating profitable trades to the adviser's own account and unprofitable ones to clients); and trading on material nonpublic information. The SEC's exam program conducts routine examinations that can surface any of these issues.

We just received an SEC examination deficiency letter. What do we do?

An exam deficiency letter is not an enforcement action, but it is the document the SEC will use against you if an enforcement proceeding follows. The letter catalogs what examiners found, and the adequacy of your response shapes whether the matter stays in the examination channel or escalates to the Division of Enforcement. Respond promptly, completely, and accurately. False or incomplete responses to exam findings create additional exposure beyond the underlying deficiencies. Engage experienced securities regulatory counsel before finalizing your response; the characterization of the facts, the legal analysis of whether they constitute violations, and the remediation steps you commit to will all be evaluated by the Division of Enforcement if the matter escalates. If the deficiency letter describes conduct that could support enforcement action, your response to the exam letter is effectively the first submission in that proceeding.

Team

Facing a government investigation?

Time matters. Contact us before the first interview request.

Contact the Firm