UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

Before the 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 

Release No. 98220 / August 25, 2023 

WHISTLEBLOWER AWARD PROCEEDING 

File No. 2023-80

In the Matter of the Claim for an Award 

in connection with 

Notice of Covered Action 

Redacted Redacted Redacted

ORDER DETERMINING WHISTLEBLOWER AWARD CLAIM 

The Claims Review Staff (“CRS”) issued a Preliminary Determination recommending the 

Redacted

denial of the whistleblower award claim submitted by (“Claimant 1”) in connection 

with the above-referenced covered action (the “Covered Action”). Claimant 1 filed a timely 

response contesting the preliminary denial. For the reasons discussed below, Claimant 1’s award 

claim is denied.1 

I. Background

A. The Covered Action

Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted

1 The CRS also preliminarily denied the award claim of Claimant 2. That claimant did not seek reconsideration of 

the Preliminary Determination, and therefore the denial of his/her claim was deemed to be the Final Order of the 

Commission under Exchange Act Rule 21F-10(f). 
According to the Commission’s Order, from 

Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted

The Commission's Order finds that 

Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted

On 

Redacted

, the Office of the Whistleblower (“OWB”) posted the Notice for 

the Covered Action on the Commission’s public website inviting claimants to submit 

whistleblower award applications within 90 days. Claimant 1 filed a timely whistleblower award 

claim. 

B. The Preliminary Determination 

The CRS issued a Preliminary Determination recommending that Claimant 1’s claim be 

denied because Claimant 1 did not provide information that led to the successful enforcement of 

the Covered Action within the meaning of Section 21F(b)(1) of the Exchange Act and Rules 

21F-3(a)(3) and 21F-4(c) thereunder. In his/her award application, Claimant 1 identified twentythree tips he/she submitted to the Commission. According to the Enforcement staff responsible 

for the Covered Action, all of the tips other than two were closed and not sent to Enforcement 

staff responsible for the Covered Action because they contained vague or insubstantial 

information. While Enforcement staff responsible for the Covered Action received two of 

Claimant 1’s tips, the information was not useful as it was either unrelated to the conduct that 

ultimately formed the charges in the Covered Action or based on publicly available information, 

of which they were already aware. Finally, Enforcement staff responsible for the Covered Action 

had no communications with Claimant 1, and to the extent he/she had communications with 

other Commission staff, they were not part of the Enforcement team responsible for the Covered 

Action. 

C. Claimant 1’s Response to the Preliminary Determination 

Claimant 1 submitted a timely written response (the “Response”) contesting the 

Preliminary Determination.2 

In his/her request for reconsideration, Claimant 1 makes the following principal 

arguments: (1) that his/her claim for award is based on two particular TCRs --

and both dated (“ TCRs”) – 

and claims that these “ 

Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted

2 See Exchange Act Rule 21F-10(e), 17 C.F.R. § 240.21F-10(e). 
and that Enforcement staff 

responsible for the Covered Action “must have received these TCRs and used them in its 

investigations;” (2) that the news article that prompted the opening of the investigation did not 

contain original information; (3) that Enforcement staff used the information in four other TCRs 

to 

subpoena documents from ; (4) that the Enforcement staff must have received and used 

two other tips in connection with subpoenaing 

another entity ; and (5) that the staff identified by Claimant 1 in his/her award 

application with whom he/she communicated must have 

forwarded his/her information on to Enforcement staff responsible for the Covered Action. 

Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted

II. Analysis 

To qualify for an award under Section 21F of the Exchange Act, a whistleblower must 

voluntarily provide the Commission with original information that leads to the successful 

enforcement of a covered action.3 Additionally, and as relevant here, original information will 

be deemed to lead to a successful enforcement action if either: (i) the original information caused 

the staff to “commence an examination, open an investigation . . . or to inquire concerning 

different conduct as part of a current examination or investigation” and the Commission brought 

a successful action based in whole or in part on conduct that was the subject of the original 

information;4 or (ii) the conduct was already under examination or investigation, and the original 

information “significantly contributed to the success of the action.”5 

In determining whether the information “significantly contributed” to the success of the 

action, the Commission will consider whether the information was “meaningful” in that it “made 

a substantial and important contribution” to the success of the covered action.6 For example, the 

Commission will consider a claimant’s information to have significantly contributed to the 

success of an enforcement action if it allowed the Commission to bring the action in significantly 

less time or with significantly fewer resources, or to bring additional successful claims or 

successful claims against additional individuals or entities.7 

As an initial matter, the record shows that Claimant 1’s information did not cause 

Enforcement staff to open the investigation. Enforcement staff confirms, in a sworn declaration, 

3 Exchange Act Section 21F(b)(1), 15 U.S.C. § 78u-6(b)(1). 

4 See Exchange Act Rule 21F-4(c)(1), 17 C.F.R. § 240.21F-4(c)(1). 

5 See Exchange Act Rule 21-F-4(c)(2), 17 C.F.R § 240.21F-4(c)(2). 

6 Order Determining Whistleblower Award Claims, Exchange Act Rel. No. 90922 (Jan. 14, 2021) at 4; see also 

Order Determining Whistleblower Award Claims, Exchange Act Rel. No. 85412 (Mar. 26, 2019) at 9 (same). 

7 Exchange Act Rel. No. 85412 at 8-9. 
which we credit, that the investigation was opened in 

Redacted

based on a newspaper article, 

prior to any information provided by Claimant 1.8

The record also reflects that Claimant 1’s information did not cause Enforcement staff 

responsible for the Covered Action to inquire into different conduct or significantly contribute to 

Redacted

the ongoing investigation. As to the TCRs identified in Claimant 1’s Response, 

Enforcement staff’s declaration confirms that they did not receive or review those tips. 

Redacted Redacted Redacted Redacted

Nor did 

Enforcement staff receive or review Claimant 1’s other tips, other than , 

submitted on , and , submitted on . Enforcement 

staff responsible for the Covered Action confirmed that they did not use these tips in connection 

with their investigation and submitted a supplemental declaration affirming that they did not use 

the information in any of Claimant 1’s tips in subpoenaing documents or information in 

connection with the Covered Action investigation. Finally, Enforcement staff responsible for the 

Covered Action confirmed that they did not communicate with the Commission staff identified 

by Claimant 1 in his/her Response concerning the conduct charged in the Covered Action. And 

contrary to Claimant 1’s assertions, Enforcement staff responsible for the Covered Action did 

not receive Claimant 1’s submissions from the other Commission staff with whom Claimant 1 

communicated. 

For these reasons, Claimant 1’s information did not lead to the successful enforcement of 

the Covered Action. 

III. Conclusion

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the whistleblower award application of 

Claimant 1 in connection with the Covered Action be, and it hereby is, denied. 

By the Commission. 

Vanessa A. Countryman 

Secretary 

8 Claimant 1’s argument that the newspaper article did not contain original information is irrelevant as to whether 

Claimant 1’s information led to the success of the Covered Action.