DOJ Set to Drop Bribery Case Against Indian Billionaire Gautam Adani

U.S. Set to Drop Charges Against Indian Billionaire Accused of Fraud

When the Justice Department indicted India’s richest man in the final weeks of the Biden administration, prosecutors described an “elaborate” bribery scheme involving “corruption and fraud at the expense of U.S. investors.”

Now, according to several people with knowledge of the case, the Justice Department is planning to drop the charges altogether.

The reversal came after the Indian billionaire, Gautam Adani, hired a new legal team led by Robert J. Giuffra Jr., one of President Trump’s personal lawyers and the co-chairman of the prominent firm Sullivan & Cromwell.

US audit regulator weighs deep staff cuts to unit overseeing accounting firms

The SEC must approve the PCAOB’s budget for 2027 before the end of this year and the audit regulator was preparing to present the SEC with a proposal that includes cuts to staff numbers, in part to free up money to invest in technology, according to people familiar with internal conversations.

“The SEC is pressing pretty hard,” said one person. “It’s more than we are used to at a granular level from the SEC.”

Jim Logothetis, who was appointed by the SEC in December to lead the PCAOB, told the FT it was “premature” to conclude that there would be cuts, as the budgetary process was in its early stages. The PCAOB declined further comment.

Senior managers had been told to draw up options for downsizing their divisions, the people said, and the PCAOB had also engaged the consulting firm Alvarez & Marsal to review its structure before the submission to the SEC in the summer.

The SEC v. Musk Fiasco and the Judge Who Said No

The Musk-SEC settlement has everything: a politically motivated lawsuit, a shadow negotiation that bypassed the government’s own lawyers, a phantom trust as the sole defendant, a waived disgorgement demand of $150 million, and a federal judge who looked at all of it and said she will not be a rubber stamp. What it does not have — yet — is a judge’s signature.

I’ve analyzed the most recent hearing transcript and every relevant precedent going back to Judge Jed Rakoff’s tumultuous SEC/Bank of America battle in 2009. I’ve mapped every irregularity against thirty years of securities enforcement history. The short version: this case is far from over (and may have only just begun). The long version and the full hearing transcript are both linked below.

This article is required reading for white collar defense attorneys, securities enforcement practitioners, ethics lawyers and anyone who advises powerful clients navigating federal investigations. It is also required reading for anyone who assumed that what happened to the SEC’s enforcement program over the last six months was the end of the story. Judge Sparkle Sooknanan just made clear it was only the end of Act One.

Semiannual Reporting: The Redditors Weigh In

To paraphrase Jerry Maguire, you had me at “that is a stupid order of operations. . .” The only negative is one that undoubtedly would have been pointed out to the authors by their fellow Redditors if this was posted on that website – it’s a 750 word wall of text without any paragraph breaks. The folks at Securities Docket flagged this problem as well, and commented “C’mon man! Just hit “Return” on the keyboard a couple times!”

Still, I wonder if Securities Docket may be pointing the finger at the wrong culprit. This seems to be a problem with a lot of comments on the SEC’s website that don’t attach a .pdf, so maybe the problem is with the SEC’s interface? In any event, whoever is to blame obviously hasn’t gotten the message that every Reddit user has heard repeatedly – “paragraphs are your friend.”

Exxon Mobil not liable to investors over Canadian oil sands, gas assets, jury says

A Texas jury on Wednesday found Exxon Mobil not ​liable on claims it defrauded ‌investors through disclosures tied to its Canadian oil sands and Rocky ​Mountain gas operations.

The 2016 ​lawsuit alleged Exxon concealed that ⁠its Canadian bitumen operations were ​losing money, failed to properly ​incorporate carbon-cost assumptions into reserve valuations, and delayed recognizing impairment charges tied to ​Rocky Mountain dry gas assets.

​Investors who acquired Exxon common stock between ‌February ⁠24, 2016 and October 28, 2016 failed to prove that the company misled them, according ​to a ​jury ⁠verdict sheet filed in Dallas federal court.

The ​investors said they bought ​Exxon ⁠shares at artificially inflated prices because the company concealed material information ⁠about ​its reserve valuations ​and accounting practices.