1. Home
  2. News and Insights
  3. Client Alert: Court Adopts SEC's New Unregistered Dealer Theory, Creates Risk of Disgorgement and Penalties for Anyone Trading Securities As Part of A Business

Client Alert: Court Adopts SEC's New Unregistered Dealer Theory, Creates Risk of Disgorgement and Penalties for Anyone Trading Securities As Part of A Business

Publications

July 18, 2023

By: Anthony Barkow, Gabriel K. Gillett, Charles D. Riely, Grace C. Signorelli-Cassady

A broad array of financial market participants—mutual funds, private funds, insurers, pension funds, family offices, individuals, and more—may be at risk after the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) secured summary judgment in a case alleging an individual and an affiliated entity acted as unregistered securities dealers when they bought and sold securities for their own account.[1]

As a recent article explained, as a result of decisions like this one, a “Sword of Damocles now hangs over … just about anyone making a dime in almost any market.”[2] That is because, under the new theory the SEC advanced in this case and other recent enforcement actions, many market participants could be required to register as dealers, disgorge profits and pay interest and penalties earned from trading activity years ago that seemed perfectly legal at the time. The decision thus serves as a red flag for a wide range of entities that buy and sell securities—and in theory could ensnare any entity that trades or invests for its own account.

The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires those who act as securities dealers to register with the SEC. The Exchange Act defines a “dealer” as “any person engaged in the business of buying and selling securities … for such person’s own account,” but exempts from that definition those who buy and sell securities “not as a part of a regular business.”[3] For nearly nine decades, that has meant that those who do not have customers, and thus cannot transact with their own customers, are not dealers. The SEC also published guidance highlighting various factors that indicate when someone is acting as a dealer.[4]

However, in a series of recent enforcement cases filed across the country, the SEC has been advocating a new and broad view—that a dealer can be anyone who is engaged in the business of buying and selling securities regardless of having customers and the presence of any factors.[5] In SEC v. Fierro, for example, the SEC alleged defendants acted as unregistered dealers when they bought convertible notes from corporate issuers, held them for at least six months, then converted the debt into equity and sold the resulting shares at a profit.[6] The district court granted summary judgment for the SEC. Relying largely on two recent district court decisions from Florida, the court held that because “Defendants were engaged in the business of buying and selling securities” they were “required to register with the SEC as dealers.”[7]

The defendants in Fierro offered reasons why the SEC’s theory should be rejected as contrary to the Exchange Act. For example, the definition of dealer historically has been understood as only applying to entities that buy and sell securities to execute customer orders—not traders or investors who take on risk—and that is how Congress understood the definition when adopting it in 1934.[8] Defendants also highlighted that they were not required to register as a dealer based on the SEC’s own rules and the SEC’s own guidance describing the relevant factors for dealer status.[9]

Still, the district court in Fierro agreed with the SEC and adopted its expansive interpretation of “dealer.” Whether that decision and others will hold up, and whether courts in other jurisdictions will follow suit, remains to be seen. But unless and until the SEC reverts to its prior and longstanding interpretation—voluntarily or via court order—traders, investors, and other participants in the financial markets would be wise to gauge the risk that their activities could be deemed to require dealer registration and disgorgement of past profits. 

Jenner & Block represents amici curiae that are encouraging courts to reject the SEC’s new theory for those reasons and others, including because courts are the wrong forum for the SEC to seek to alter its rules or to amend the statutory definition of dealer.[10]

[1] SEC v. Fierro, No. 20-cv-2104 (D. NJ June 29, 2023), ECF No. 50.

[2] Brandon Kochkodin, Forbes, The Government Is Quietly Suing Its Way To Broader Powers Over Traders (July 12, 2023), https://tradingmarketsproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/The-Government-Is-Quietly-Suing-Its-Way-To-Broader-Powers-Over-Traders.pdf.

[3] 15 U.S.C. § 78c(a)(5).

[4] SEC, Guide to Broker-Dealer Registration (April 2008; revised Dec. 12, 2016), https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/guide-broker-dealer-registration.

[5]  See, e.g., SEC v. Auctus Fund Management, LLC, No. 23-cv-11233 (D. Mass. filed June 1, 2023); SEC v. LG Capital Funding, LLC, No. 22-cv-03353 (E.D.N.Y. filed June 7, 2022); SEC v. Carebourn Cap., L.P., No. 21-cv-02144 (D.M.N. filed Sept. 24, 2021); SEC v. GPL Ventures LLC, No. 21-cv-06814 (S.D.N.Y. filed Aug. 13, 2021); SEC v. Morningview Financial, LLC, No. 22-cv-8142 (S.D.N.Y. filed Sept. 23, 2022); SEC v. Fife, No. 20-cv-5227 (N.D. Ill. filed Sept. 3, 2020); SEC v. Keener, No. 20-cv-21254 (S.D. Fla. filed Mar. 24, 2020); SEC v. Fierro, No. 3:20-cv-2104 (D.N.J. filed Feb. 26, 2020); SEC v. River N. Equity LLC, No. 1:19-cv-1711 (N.D. Ill. filed Mar. 11, 2019).

[6] Slip op. 1-3.

[7] Slip op. 15 (relying on SEC v. Almagarby, 479 F. Supp. 3d 1266 (S.D. Fla. 2020), appeal pending, No. 21-13755 (11th Cir.); SEC v. Keener, 2020 WL 4736205 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 14, 2020), appeal pending, No. 22-14237 (11th Cir.)).

[8] See Defs.’ Opp. to MSJ at 6-10.

[9] See Defs.’ Opp. to MSJ at 11-14.

[10] See Mot. for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief, SEC v. LG Capital Funding, LLC, No. 22-cv-3353 (E.D.N.Y. July 13, 2023), ECF No. 39; Brief of Amici Curiae, SEC v. Morningview Financial, LLC, No. 22-cv-8142 (S.D.N.Y. July 6, 2023), ECF No. 33; Unopposed Mot. for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief, SEC v. Almagarby, No. 21-13755 (11th Cir. July 13, 2023), ECF No. 60-1; Brief of Amicus Curiae, SEC v. Keener, No. 22-14237 (11th Cir. June 7, 2023), ECF No. 36.

Footnotes

[1] SEC v. Fierro, No. 20-cv-2104 (D. NJ June 29, 2023), ECF No. 50.

[2] Brandon Kochkodin, Forbes, The Government Is Quietly Suing Its Way To Broader Powers Over Traders (July 12, 2023), https://tradingmarketsproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/The-Government-Is-Quietly-Suing-Its-Way-To-Broader-Powers-Over-Traders.pdf.

[3] 15 U.S.C. § 78c(a)(5).

[4] SEC, Guide to Broker-Dealer Registration (April 2008; revised Dec. 12, 2016), https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/guide-broker-dealer-registration.

[5]  See, e.g., SEC v. Auctus Fund Management, LLC, No. 23-cv-11233 (D. Mass. filed June 1, 2023); SEC v. LG Capital Funding, LLC, No. 22-cv-03353 (E.D.N.Y. filed June 7, 2022); SEC v. Carebourn Cap., L.P., No. 21-cv-02144 (D.M.N. filed Sept. 24, 2021); SEC v. GPL Ventures LLC, No. 21-cv-06814 (S.D.N.Y. filed Aug. 13, 2021); SEC v. Morningview Financial, LLC, No. 22-cv-8142 (S.D.N.Y. filed Sept. 23, 2022); SEC v. Fife, No. 20-cv-5227 (N.D. Ill. filed Sept. 3, 2020); SEC v. Keener, No. 20-cv-21254 (S.D. Fla. filed Mar. 24, 2020); SEC v. Fierro, No. 3:20-cv-2104 (D.N.J. filed Feb. 26, 2020); SEC v. River N. Equity LLC, No. 1:19-cv-1711 (N.D. Ill. filed Mar. 11, 2019).

[6] Slip op. 1-3.

[7] Slip op. 15 (relying on SEC v. Almagarby, 479 F. Supp. 3d 1266 (S.D. Fla. 2020), appeal pending, No. 21-13755 (11th Cir.); SEC v. Keener, 2020 WL 4736205 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 14, 2020), appeal pending, No. 22-14237 (11th Cir.)).

[8] See Defs.’ Opp. to MSJ at 6-10.

[9] See Defs.’ Opp. to MSJ at 11-14.

[10] See Mot. for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief, SEC v. LG Capital Funding, LLC, No. 22-cv-3353 (E.D.N.Y. July 13, 2023), ECF No. 39; Brief of Amici Curiae, SEC v. Morningview Financial, LLC, No. 22-cv-8142 (S.D.N.Y. July 6, 2023), ECF No. 33; Unopposed Mot. for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief, SEC v. Almagarby, No. 21-13755 (11th Cir. July 13, 2023), ECF No. 60-1; Brief of Amicus Curiae, SEC v. Keener, No. 22-14237 (11th Cir. June 7, 2023), ECF No. 36.

Related Capabilities

© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.

Stay Informed

Client Alert: Court Adopts SEC's New Unregistered Dealer Theory, Creates Risk of Disgorgement and Penalties for Anyone Trading Securities As Part of A Business

Publications

July 18, 2023

By: Anthony Barkow, Gabriel K. Gillett, Charles D. Riely, Grace C. Signorelli-Cassady

A broad array of financial market participants—mutual funds, private funds, insurers, pension funds, family offices, individuals, and more—may be at risk after the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) secured summary judgment in a case alleging an individual and an affiliated entity acted as unregistered securities dealers when they bought and sold securities for their own account.[1]

As a recent article explained, as a result of decisions like this one, a “Sword of Damocles now hangs over … just about anyone making a dime in almost any market.”[2] That is because, under the new theory the SEC advanced in this case and other recent enforcement actions, many market participants could be required to register as dealers, disgorge profits and pay interest and penalties earned from trading activity years ago that seemed perfectly legal at the time. The decision thus serves as a red flag for a wide range of entities that buy and sell securities—and in theory could ensnare any entity that trades or invests for its own account.

The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires those who act as securities dealers to register with the SEC. The Exchange Act defines a “dealer” as “any person engaged in the business of buying and selling securities … for such person’s own account,” but exempts from that definition those who buy and sell securities “not as a part of a regular business.”[3] For nearly nine decades, that has meant that those who do not have customers, and thus cannot transact with their own customers, are not dealers. The SEC also published guidance highlighting various factors that indicate when someone is acting as a dealer.[4]

However, in a series of recent enforcement cases filed across the country, the SEC has been advocating a new and broad view—that a dealer can be anyone who is engaged in the business of buying and selling securities regardless of having customers and the presence of any factors.[5] In SEC v. Fierro, for example, the SEC alleged defendants acted as unregistered dealers when they bought convertible notes from corporate issuers, held them for at least six months, then converted the debt into equity and sold the resulting shares at a profit.[6] The district court granted summary judgment for the SEC. Relying largely on two recent district court decisions from Florida, the court held that because “Defendants were engaged in the business of buying and selling securities” they were “required to register with the SEC as dealers.”[7]

The defendants in Fierro offered reasons why the SEC’s theory should be rejected as contrary to the Exchange Act. For example, the definition of dealer historically has been understood as only applying to entities that buy and sell securities to execute customer orders—not traders or investors who take on risk—and that is how Congress understood the definition when adopting it in 1934.[8] Defendants also highlighted that they were not required to register as a dealer based on the SEC’s own rules and the SEC’s own guidance describing the relevant factors for dealer status.[9]

Still, the district court in Fierro agreed with the SEC and adopted its expansive interpretation of “dealer.” Whether that decision and others will hold up, and whether courts in other jurisdictions will follow suit, remains to be seen. But unless and until the SEC reverts to its prior and longstanding interpretation—voluntarily or via court order—traders, investors, and other participants in the financial markets would be wise to gauge the risk that their activities could be deemed to require dealer registration and disgorgement of past profits. 

Jenner & Block represents amici curiae that are encouraging courts to reject the SEC’s new theory for those reasons and others, including because courts are the wrong forum for the SEC to seek to alter its rules or to amend the statutory definition of dealer.[10]

[1] SEC v. Fierro, No. 20-cv-2104 (D. NJ June 29, 2023), ECF No. 50.

[2] Brandon Kochkodin, Forbes, The Government Is Quietly Suing Its Way To Broader Powers Over Traders (July 12, 2023), https://tradingmarketsproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/The-Government-Is-Quietly-Suing-Its-Way-To-Broader-Powers-Over-Traders.pdf.

[3] 15 U.S.C. § 78c(a)(5).

[4] SEC, Guide to Broker-Dealer Registration (April 2008; revised Dec. 12, 2016), https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/guide-broker-dealer-registration.

[5]  See, e.g., SEC v. Auctus Fund Management, LLC, No. 23-cv-11233 (D. Mass. filed June 1, 2023); SEC v. LG Capital Funding, LLC, No. 22-cv-03353 (E.D.N.Y. filed June 7, 2022); SEC v. Carebourn Cap., L.P., No. 21-cv-02144 (D.M.N. filed Sept. 24, 2021); SEC v. GPL Ventures LLC, No. 21-cv-06814 (S.D.N.Y. filed Aug. 13, 2021); SEC v. Morningview Financial, LLC, No. 22-cv-8142 (S.D.N.Y. filed Sept. 23, 2022); SEC v. Fife, No. 20-cv-5227 (N.D. Ill. filed Sept. 3, 2020); SEC v. Keener, No. 20-cv-21254 (S.D. Fla. filed Mar. 24, 2020); SEC v. Fierro, No. 3:20-cv-2104 (D.N.J. filed Feb. 26, 2020); SEC v. River N. Equity LLC, No. 1:19-cv-1711 (N.D. Ill. filed Mar. 11, 2019).

[6] Slip op. 1-3.

[7] Slip op. 15 (relying on SEC v. Almagarby, 479 F. Supp. 3d 1266 (S.D. Fla. 2020), appeal pending, No. 21-13755 (11th Cir.); SEC v. Keener, 2020 WL 4736205 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 14, 2020), appeal pending, No. 22-14237 (11th Cir.)).

[8] See Defs.’ Opp. to MSJ at 6-10.

[9] See Defs.’ Opp. to MSJ at 11-14.

[10] See Mot. for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief, SEC v. LG Capital Funding, LLC, No. 22-cv-3353 (E.D.N.Y. July 13, 2023), ECF No. 39; Brief of Amici Curiae, SEC v. Morningview Financial, LLC, No. 22-cv-8142 (S.D.N.Y. July 6, 2023), ECF No. 33; Unopposed Mot. for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief, SEC v. Almagarby, No. 21-13755 (11th Cir. July 13, 2023), ECF No. 60-1; Brief of Amicus Curiae, SEC v. Keener, No. 22-14237 (11th Cir. June 7, 2023), ECF No. 36.

Footnotes

[1] SEC v. Fierro, No. 20-cv-2104 (D. NJ June 29, 2023), ECF No. 50.

[2] Brandon Kochkodin, Forbes, The Government Is Quietly Suing Its Way To Broader Powers Over Traders (July 12, 2023), https://tradingmarketsproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/The-Government-Is-Quietly-Suing-Its-Way-To-Broader-Powers-Over-Traders.pdf.

[3] 15 U.S.C. § 78c(a)(5).

[4] SEC, Guide to Broker-Dealer Registration (April 2008; revised Dec. 12, 2016), https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/guide-broker-dealer-registration.

[5]  See, e.g., SEC v. Auctus Fund Management, LLC, No. 23-cv-11233 (D. Mass. filed June 1, 2023); SEC v. LG Capital Funding, LLC, No. 22-cv-03353 (E.D.N.Y. filed June 7, 2022); SEC v. Carebourn Cap., L.P., No. 21-cv-02144 (D.M.N. filed Sept. 24, 2021); SEC v. GPL Ventures LLC, No. 21-cv-06814 (S.D.N.Y. filed Aug. 13, 2021); SEC v. Morningview Financial, LLC, No. 22-cv-8142 (S.D.N.Y. filed Sept. 23, 2022); SEC v. Fife, No. 20-cv-5227 (N.D. Ill. filed Sept. 3, 2020); SEC v. Keener, No. 20-cv-21254 (S.D. Fla. filed Mar. 24, 2020); SEC v. Fierro, No. 3:20-cv-2104 (D.N.J. filed Feb. 26, 2020); SEC v. River N. Equity LLC, No. 1:19-cv-1711 (N.D. Ill. filed Mar. 11, 2019).

[6] Slip op. 1-3.

[7] Slip op. 15 (relying on SEC v. Almagarby, 479 F. Supp. 3d 1266 (S.D. Fla. 2020), appeal pending, No. 21-13755 (11th Cir.); SEC v. Keener, 2020 WL 4736205 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 14, 2020), appeal pending, No. 22-14237 (11th Cir.)).

[8] See Defs.’ Opp. to MSJ at 6-10.

[9] See Defs.’ Opp. to MSJ at 11-14.

[10] See Mot. for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief, SEC v. LG Capital Funding, LLC, No. 22-cv-3353 (E.D.N.Y. July 13, 2023), ECF No. 39; Brief of Amici Curiae, SEC v. Morningview Financial, LLC, No. 22-cv-8142 (S.D.N.Y. July 6, 2023), ECF No. 33; Unopposed Mot. for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief, SEC v. Almagarby, No. 21-13755 (11th Cir. July 13, 2023), ECF No. 60-1; Brief of Amicus Curiae, SEC v. Keener, No. 22-14237 (11th Cir. June 7, 2023), ECF No. 36.

Related Capabilities

© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.

Stay Informed

News and Insights

Event

Associate Steven Arango to Speak at the Veterans' Legal Career Fair

On September 18, Associate Steven Arango will speak on a panel at the Veterans' Legal Career Fair (VLCF), the only legal career fair in the United States dedicated to veterans, active-duty service members, and military spouses.

September 18, 2026

Event

Partner AnnaMarie Van Hoesen to Speak on ABA National Legal Malpractice Conference Panel

Partner AnnaMarie Van Hoesen will join a panel at the National Legal Malpractice Conference hosted by the American Bar Association (ABA) in Las Vegas on September 17.

September 17, 2026

Recognition

Jenner & Block Named Finalist in Seven 2026 D.C. Legal Awards Categories

Law.com and The National Law Journal have named Jenner & Block a finalist in all seven categories in which the firm and its attorneys were considered for the 2026 D.C. Legal Awards.

August 28, 2026

Client Alerts

Back to School: What to Watch This Year in Higher Education Law and Policy

As institutions of higher education prepare for the 2026-2027 academic year, colleges and universities remain in the federal regulatory spotlight. Key areas of expected federal regulatory and enforcement activity include Title VI, federal grants and contracts, accreditation, immigration, foreign gifts and contracts, student loans, gender identity and Title IX, college athletics, and antitrust. Understanding and anticipating these developments will help institutions navigate new compliance obliga

August 25, 2026

News

Jenner & Block Files US Supreme Court Amicus Brief on Behalf of Historians of Education

Jenner & Block filed an amicus brief with the US Supreme Court on August 24, 2026, on behalf of three historians of American education -- Robert N. Gross, Adam Laats, and Ann Marie Ryan -- in support of Colorado officials defending the state's preschool nondiscrimination policy in St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy.

August 25, 2026

Publications

Partner Howard Suskin Authors 2026 Edition of LexisNexis’s Practical Guidance Series on Illinois Civil Litigation

Partner Howard Suskin has authored a set of practice guides on Illinois civil litigation for the 2026 edition of LexisNexis's Practical Guidance series.

August 25, 2026

News

Partner Ashley Callen Named Fall 2026 Fellow at the Georgetown University Institute of Politics and Public Service

Partner Ashley Callen, Co-Chair of the firm's Congressional Investigations Practice, has been named a Fall 2026 Fellow at the Georgetown University Institute of Politics and Public Service at the McCourt School of Public Policy. 

August 20, 2026

Publications

In American Banker, Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon Weighs in on OCC's Handling of Fintech Bank Charter Applications

Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon spoke with American Banker about how the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is approaching bank charter applications from fintechs, amid a growing wave of companies seeking charters from federal regulators.

August 18, 2026

Recognition

Crain's Chicago Business Names Three Jenner & Block Partners to 2026 Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting & Law List

Crain's Chicago Business recognized Jenner & Block Partners Annie Kastanek, Wade Thomson, and Andrew Vail among its 2026 Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting & Law. The list spotlights firm leaders and practice heads whose work shapes business, civic life, and the courts throughout the region.

August 17, 2026

Event

Partner David Greenwald to Speak at PLI Program on Privilege and AI

On August 17, David Greenwald will speak at "Fitting New “Tech” Into the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Protection," a virtual program hosted by the Practising Law Institute (PLI).

August 17, 2026

Recognition

Partner Neil Barofsky Named Finalist for Attorney of the Year by The American Lawyer 2026 Industry Awards 

Partner Neil Barofsky has been named a finalist for Attorney of the Year by The American Lawyer as part of its 2026 Industry Awards. The award recognizes lawyers whose work over the past year has had significant impact on their clients, the profession, or the public interest. Winners will be announced at the annual gala on November 12 in New York. 

August 17, 2026

Client Alerts

Are You Employing a North Korean IT Worker? What Companies Need to Know to Prepare for and Respond to this Threat

On July 31, 2026, the US Department of State and the FBI, joined by counterpart agencies in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, South Korea, and the United Kingdom, issued a joint alert on North Korean IT workers who use false identities to infiltrate companies and fund North Korea's weapons programs. It’s the latest in a now-familiar cadence of warnings issued roughly once a year since 2022. Since then, sanctions actions, DOJ indictments, “laptop farm

August 13, 2026

News

Jenner & Block Secures Precedential Third Circuit Ruling for Pro Bono Client in Prison Retaliation Case

A Jenner & Block team secured a precedential ruling from the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on behalf of pro bono client Brandon Timmons, an incarcerated person in a Pennsylvania state prison who alleged that a prison official retaliated against him for filing complaints against staff.

August 13, 2026

Recognition

Partner Lauren Hartz Recognized in Bloomberg Law's 2026 "They've Got Next" List

Partner Lauren Hartz was recognized in Bloomberg Law's They've Got Next: 40 Under 40 list for 2026. The annual report recognizes “next-generation lawyers” excelling in a profession being reshaped by AI and new avenues for leadership, service, and success. Lauren, who co-leads Jenner & Block's Education Practice, was recognized in the Education category.

August 13, 2026

Publications

Special Counsel Kimberly Cook Featured in FCBA Member Spotlight

The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) featured Kimberly Cook in its Member Spotlight series.

August 13, 2026

Recognition

Jenner & Block Ranked #3 in The American Lawyer's A-List

Jenner & Block has ranked #3 in The American Lawyer's 2026 A-List — the firm’s highest placement yet among the top 20 elite firms recognized as "the best of the best."

August 12, 2026

Publications

Partner Jan Larson and Summer Associate Averi Suk Discuss California FAIR Plan's Expanding Role in Law360

Partner Jan Larson, Co-Chair of the firm’s Insurance Recovery and Counseling Practice, and Summer Associate Averi Suk co-authored an article for Law360 examining how a historic rate increase, a significant litigation outcome, and a new round of legislation are together reshaping the California FAIR Plan's role in the state's insurance market.

August 12, 2026

Event

Associate Tal Ratner Solovey to Speak on JFEDLA Legal and Tech Network AI Panel

Associate Tal Ratner Solovey will speak on a panel hosted by the Jewish Federation Los Angeles (JFEDLA) Legal and Tech Networks on August 10 in Century City.

August 10, 2026

Recognition

Three Jenner & Block Partners Named to Crain's New York Business' 2026 Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting & Law List

Crain's New York Business recognized Jenner & Block Partners Anthony Barkow, Alison Stein, and Damian Williams among its 2026 Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting & Law.

August 10, 2026

Recognition

Jenner & Block Earns Firm and Individual Rankings in Chambers Crisis & Risk Management Guide Debut

Jenner & Block earned a ranking in the USA – Nationwide category in its first year featured in the Chambers Crisis & Risk Management Guide. Global Crisis Management and Strategic Risk Practice Co-Chair Joanna Ludlam received an individual ranking in the UK-wide category.

August 7, 2026

View All News and Insights