Register Here

Monday, November 10 | 1:00–3:10 p.m. ET

Lu Reyes and John West, members of Troutman Pepper Locke’s Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement practice, will participate in an upcoming CLE webinar with myLawCLE. They will discuss the difference in approaches between state attorney general (AG) investigations and federal enforcement actions.

Summary

  • The False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provision allows private citizens (relators) to sue on the government’s behalf for FCA violations and receive a portion of any settlement or award.
  • The FCA qui tam provision has evolved since its inception, and recent U.S. Supreme Court cases signal a move to rein in the power of relators.
  • Funding sources, claim truthfulness, and companies’ subjective understanding will be critical issues in FCA enforcement efforts against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
  • The current Court hasn’t ruled on the constitutionality of the FCA qui tam provision because no case before it directly raised the issue, but it may soon have the chance.

Register Here

Wednesday, October 29 | 1:00 – 3:10 p.m. ET

Mike Yaghi and Lane Page, members of Troutman Pepper Locke’s State Attorneys General practice, along with Stefanie Jackman and Caleb Rosenberg from the Consumer Financial Services practice, will participate in an upcoming CLE webinar with myLawCLE. They will analyze the evolving roles and enforcement priorities of federal and state regulatory agencies, focusing on their impact on consumer financial services.

In May, we wrote about the Trump administration’s first major enforcement action involving the importation of unauthorized e-cigarettes, in which the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized products valued at nearly $34 million. FDA and CBP have once again seized unauthorized e-cigarettes in Chicago, but this time the estimated retail value was $86.5 million — the largest seizure of its kind. This enforcement action is consistent with a statement on FDA’s website: “[e]nforcing against unauthorized ENDS products, including unauthorized products popular with youth, are [sic] among our highest enforcement priorities.” FDA maintains that decisions about whether to take enforcement action will continue to be made on a case-by-case basis after considering youth use and other risk factors.

Register Here
Thursday, September 25 • 1:00 – 3:10 p.m. ET

Sadia Mirza, co-leader of Troutman Pepper Locke’s Incidents + Investigations practice, Privacy + Cyber Partner Timothy St. George, and Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement Counsel Gene Fishel, will participate in an upcoming CLE with myLawCLE to examine the nuances of navigating cybersecurity breaches.

On August 19, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Allied Stone Inc. (Allied Stone) and its president, Jia “Jerry” Lim, agreed to pay $12.4 million in settlement to resolve allegations that the company violated the False Claims Act (FCA) by evading, or conspiring to evade, antidumping and countervailing duties owed on quartz surface products imported from China. Allied Stone is a Dallas-based countertop and cabinetry supplier. According to the DOJ, Allied Stone misrepresented Chinese quartz surface products as other merchandise subject to lesser duties to avoid the applicable antidumping and countervailing duties. The company also allegedly failed to declare and pay, and failed to ensure that others were declaring and paying, applicable duties owed to the U.S. on entries of its Chinese quartz surface products.

On August 12, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ordered Match Group, owners and operators of online dating platforms such as Match.com, OkCupid, PlentyOfFish, The League, and others, to pay $14 million. This settlement resolves the FTC’s 2019 complaint accusing Match of misleading claims involving guarantees and onerous subscription cancellation processes, contrary to the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA).

We recently wrote about a federal case here and here involving key issues related to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) authority to enforce the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act (PACT Act) against federally recognized Indian tribes and ATF’s interpretation of key sections of the PACT Act. In addition to appealing the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California’s decision, we noted that the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians (the Tribe) asked the district court to require ATF to remove it from the agency’s PACT Act noncompliant list (NCL) and prevent ATF and the other defendant, the Department of Justice from taking action against it pending its appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On July 30, the federal district court denied the Tribe’s request.

In July 2025, a bipartisan coalition of 32 state and territorial attorneys general (AG) sent a letter to congressional leaders urging the passage of the Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation (SAFER) Banking Act. Their letter emphasizes that the legislation — a long-stalled federal reform — would provide legal clarity and a safe harbor for banks and financial institutions to serve state-licensed cannabis businesses. Such clarity, they argue, is urgently needed to address public safety risks and to improve the states’ ability to regulate and tax the booming cannabis industry.