By the time most companies and executives understand they are under investigation, federal prosecutors have already been working on the matter for months. Subpoenas have gone to banks, vendors, and former employees. Cooperation deals have been negotiated with witnesses who once seemed loyal. Charging decisions are being framed by an internal narrative that the target has not yet had a meaningful chance to influence. The work of moving that narrative; demonstrating why charges should not be filed or why penalties should be reduced; often happens in a window that closes faster than is widely understood.<\/p>\n
Seiden Law’s Sanctions, White Collar, Investigations & Regulatory group is staffed by former federal and state prosecutors and seasoned trial lawyers who defend companies, boards, executives, and high-profile individuals in sensitive investigations and government enforcement actions. The firm appears regularly before the DOJ, U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, SEC, FBI, state attorneys general, OFAC, and other domestic and foreign authorities. The goal is simple: end matters quickly and favorably, ideally before charges are filed.<\/p>\n
Headquartered in New York with a global disputes platform, the firm handles investigations and enforcement matters that span Asia, Europe, and the Middle East; often coordinating with foreign counsel and regulators in parallel tracks.<\/p>\n
Federal white-collar investigations rarely begin with a target letter. They more often begin quietly; through whistleblower tips routed to the SEC under the Dodd-Frank bounty program, through grand jury subpoenas to third parties whose cooperation is sought before the target is approached, through coordinated regulatory referrals between agencies, or through ongoing surveillance of an industry sector under a broader enforcement initiative. The first signal a company receives may be a subpoena to a vendor, a request for documents from a regulator, an interview request to a former employee, or simply the discovery that bank records have been provided to investigators.<\/p>\n
How counsel responds in the first days and weeks after that signal often shapes the trajectory of the entire matter. The choices are not always obvious. Whether to commission an internal investigation, and how to scope it. Whether to engage with prosecutors immediately, and through whom. Whether to extend privilege protections to individual employees through joint defense agreements or to advise them to retain separate counsel. Whether voluntary self-disclosure under one of the available DOJ or SEC programs makes sense for the matter at hand.<\/p>\n
The firm’s former prosecutor experience informs each of these decisions. Lawyers who have run grand jury investigations, made charging decisions, and negotiated resolutions on the government side bring directly relevant judgment to the question of how prosecutors and regulators will read a given factual record.<\/p>\n
The firm’s WRIS work is supported by integrated capabilities elsewhere in the firm. Sanctions (OFAC) and regulatory capabilities cover licensing<\/strong><\/a>, delisting<\/strong><\/a>, mitigation<\/strong><\/a>, and when needed, suing OFAC to compel agency action. Judgment enforcement and asset recovery capabilities engage when investigations intersect with monetization, asset protection, or receiverships.<\/p>\n If you have received a subpoena, an inquiry, a target letter, or a whistleblower allegation, or if circumstances suggest that an investigation may be developing, an early consultation can clarify the most consequential decisions and the work required to address them. The firm mobilizes immediately on matters of this kind with former-prosecutor insight, global coordination, and a result-focused plan.<\/p>\n To discuss a potential white-collar or investigations matter, the firm can be reached through the contact form on this site or by phone. Initial consultations are confidential.<\/p>\n OFAC, sanctions compliance, internal investigations, and regulatory enforcement.<\/p>","protected":false},"featured_media":67117,"menu_order":140,"template":"","practice_category":[27],"class_list":["post-72","practice_area","type-practice_area","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","practice_category-sanctions-investigations-regulatory"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/seidenlaw.com\/he\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/practice_area\/72","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/seidenlaw.com\/he\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/practice_area"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/seidenlaw.com\/he\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/practice_area"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seidenlaw.com\/he\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/67117"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/seidenlaw.com\/he\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=72"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"practice_category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seidenlaw.com\/he\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/practice_category?post=72"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Speak With the WRIS Team<\/h2>\n