On November 4, 2022, compliance with amended Rule 206(4)-1 (the “Marketing Rule”) became mandatory for all investment advisers registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).[1] Seven months since the compliance date, SEC-registered investment advisers continue to discover and adapt to challenges in applying the Marketing Rule. Newly formed advisers also face significant obstacles to marketing with a predecessor-firm track record. It has also impacted advisers’ interaction with placement agents and solicitors. And finally, the SEC has begun assessing advisers’ adherence to the rule through routine compliance examinations. All parties involved continue to adapt to the new environment.

Implementation Challenges

Advisers continue to find challenges in applying the Marketing Rule to their practices, among which are the following:

  • Definition of “Advertisement”. Whether certain materials used in marketing qualify as “advertisements” is a common question, particularly in marketing for a new private fund – for example, DDQs or other materials prepared for a specific investor, or “annual general meeting” presentations to fund investors. Taking a pragmatic approach, advisers may find that applying “advertising” standards even to items that might not be “advertisements” can facilitate repurposing that material for broader marketing and also ensure compliance with the anti-fraud provisions of Advisers Act Sec. 206 and Rule 206(4)-8, which apply even to non-“advertisements”.
  • “Net of Fees” Requirement. While initially unclear, the SEC has now confirmed that all instances of sub-portfolio investment performance, including the performance of individual investments, must be shown net of fees and expenses.[2] However, advisers are left to determine how to calculate such net performance. Regardless of the approach selected, advisers must provide full disclosure of the calculation methodology, the underlying assumptions used and any known shortcomings.[3]
  • Use of “Model Fees.” The calculation of a portfolio’s net returns is complicated by the fee levels borne by different investors within the portfolio. Practice varies across advisers in terms of whether and how to calculate net performance based on a model fee. Here too, advisers are managing the related compliance risk through careful disclosure of the calculation methodology and related assumptions.
  • “Hypothetical” Performance. Among private fund advisers, it is common to include certain figures that are now classified as “hypothetical” performance, such as return targets or projections and/or composites of extracted performance. This use of “hypothetical” performance figures now requires specific written policies and procedures, the absence of which could lead to deficiency findings in an SEC exam.
  • Inclusion of “Related Performance.” Advisers marketing a new product often use the investment performance of similar products managed by the adviser, triggering a need to disclose the performance of all other “related portfolios” (with limited exceptions). Practices vary, given the highly variable circumstances across advisers, but again advisers are managing compliance risk through careful disclosure of the selection criteria.
  • Substantiating Statements of Material Fact. The requirement to substantiate all statements of material fact in an advertisement has resulted in advisers spending many hours identifying sources and building back-up files of supporting materials in case needed in a later SEC exam – or, where back-up cannot be located, changing the relevant text to something that is more easily supportable. Advisers that have not yet undertaken this exercise should expect to devote time and resources to doing so.

Challenges for New Firms

Newly formed adviser firms face challenges when using investment performance achieved at a prior firm, including in the following scenarios:

  • Not “Primarily Responsible” for the Investment Performance. Where an advertisement includes investment performance achieved at a prior firm, the relevant individuals must have been “primarily responsible” for achieving that performance at the prior firm. Where investment decisions at the prior firm were made by a committee, there must be a “substantial identity” with the individuals on that committee and on any similar committee at the new firm. This is not always the case in practice.
  • No Back-Up Records. A new adviser firm seeking to market using prior-firm investment performance must also have access to the back-up records that are necessary to substantiate such performance. Again, this is not always the case in practice.

In both scenarios, practice remains varied across advisers depending on how closely the adviser’s facts align with the Marketing Rule’s requirements. With greater divergence comes greater compliance risk.

Challenges in Working with Placement Agents and Solicitors

For advisers marketing through placement agents and other compensated solicitors, confirmation that investors are receiving the required disclosures can be a challenge, particularly where an adviser retains many such firms, making oversight difficult. In addition, advisers using non SEC-registered firms (particularly ones located outside the U.S., where SEC registration is less common) are meeting resistance when imposing the required compensation disclosures – detailed disclosures that can be controversial. These challenges must be navigated to reduce the adviser’s compliance risk.

SEC Exams: Early Focus Areas

Following the SEC’s September 2022 announcement of examination focus on Marketing Rule compliance, the adviser community braced for a series of “sweep” exams focused primarily on this topic.[4] Today, however, SEC examination focus is mainly occurring through routine compliance examinations, with segments of these exams focusing on basic compliance with the rule, including: changes to the adviser’s policies and procedures and any new training for adviser personnel in response to the rule, the adviser’s review and approval process for marketing materials including substantiation of material facts (and related back-up), marketing through placement agents or solicitors, a review of a sampling of the adviser’s marketing materials and other related matters. 

While none of these focus areas are unexpected or controversial, many intersect with the topics outlined above on which advisers continue to struggle in implementing the rule. Advisers working through such issues should therefore be prepared to discuss their chosen approach with SEC staff during their next exam, as many of those topics seem likely to be reviewed.

Moving Forward

As with all significant new rulemaking, the Marketing Rule has imposed significant changes on advisers’ practices. New market norms have taken time to develop and will continue to evolve. And further guidance from the SEC, through the examination process itself, future guidance based on its examination experiences or potential enforcement actions alleging violations of the rules, will also further steer and solidify market practices on more of these issues. Both advisers and the SEC are still finding their way forward.

Read more of our Top Ten Regulatory and Litigation Risks for Private Funds in 2023.


[1] For an overview of the amendments to the Marketing Rule, see “SEC Revises Marketing Rule for Registered Investment Advisers,” Proskauer Alert, Feb. 9, 2021.

[2] For an overview of the SEC’s confirmation on this issue, see “SEC Breaks its Silence on the New Marketing Rule’s Net Performance Requirements,” Proskauer Alert, Jan. 18, 2023.

[3] See the Proskauer Alert described in fn.2 above for a brief description of a potential simplified approach, as well as some of the related assumptions and shortcomings of those assumptions.

[4] For an overview of the SEC’s September 2022 Risk Alert on this topic, see “SEC Issues Risk Alert Announcing Exams Focused on New Marketing Rule”, Proskauer Alert, Sept. 22, 2022.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Margaret A. Dale Margaret A. Dale

Margaret Dale is a trial lawyer and first-chair litigator handling complex business disputes across a wide variety of industries, including: consumer products, media and entertainment, financial services, telecommunications and technology, and higher education. She is a former vice-chair of the Litigation Department, and…

Margaret Dale is a trial lawyer and first-chair litigator handling complex business disputes across a wide variety of industries, including: consumer products, media and entertainment, financial services, telecommunications and technology, and higher education. She is a former vice-chair of the Litigation Department, and heads the Department’s Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group. Margaret has been recognized since 2017 in Benchmark Litigation’s Top 250 Women in Litigation.

Margaret’s practice covers the spectrum of complex commercial disputes, including privacy and data security matters, as well as disputes involving M&A, intellectual property, bankruptcy and insolvency, securities, corporate governance, and asset management.

Margaret regularly counsels clients before litigation commences to assess risk, adopt strategies to minimize or deflect disputes, and resolve matters without going to court.

Margaret is a frequent writer, including authoring a regular column on corporate and securities law in the New York Law Journal. She also serves as the lead editor of Proskauer’s blog on commercial litigation, Minding Your BusinessShe also authored the chapter titled “Privileges” in the treatise Commercial Litigation in New York State Courts (Haig, 5th ed.), as well as the chapter titled “Data Breach Litigation” in PLI’s Proskauer on Privacy.

Margaret maintains an active pro bono practice advocating on issues relating to women, children and veterans. She serves on the Board of Directors of CFR (Center for Family Representation), VLA (Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts), JALBC (Judges and Lawyers Breast Cancer Alert), and the City Bar Fund.

Photo of Michael R. Hackett Michael R. Hackett

Mike Hackett is a partner in the Litigation Department and Co-Head of the Asset Management Litigation practice. An experienced litigator and trial lawyer, Mike’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, with a particular emphasis on asset management, financial services, M&A, shareholder, and life…

Mike Hackett is a partner in the Litigation Department and Co-Head of the Asset Management Litigation practice. An experienced litigator and trial lawyer, Mike’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, with a particular emphasis on asset management, financial services, M&A, shareholder, and life sciences disputes.

A significant portion of Mike’s practice concerns disputes and regulation involving private funds, including private equity, venture capital, hedge, real estate and private credit funds, as well as their sponsors, partners, investors, portfolio companies, and officers and directors. Mike’s experience representing private fund clients runs the gamut, from control contests within advisers, to disputes between limited partners and general partners, to representation of investment advisers in connection with regulatory examinations, investigations and enforcement matters. Mike routinely represents funds, fund sponsors, portfolio companies, and their officers and directors, including in significant post-closing M&A disputes.

Mike also litigates high-stakes commercial disputes in the life sciences and financial services areas, including for established pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, emerging and innovative start-ups, asset managers, and other private capital investors, in areas such as M&A, breach of contract, indemnification, fraud, contested earnouts and royalties, securities and capital markets, and corporate governance.

Mike has been recognized by Chambers USA and was named a “Rising Star” by Massachusetts Super Lawyers.

Photo of William Komaroff William Komaroff

Bill Komaroff is a partner in the Litigation Department and White Collar Practice Group. He has a nationwide federal practice focused on corporate defense and investigations, counseling and defending institutional and individual clients in connection with a broad array of complex government investigations…

Bill Komaroff is a partner in the Litigation Department and White Collar Practice Group. He has a nationwide federal practice focused on corporate defense and investigations, counseling and defending institutional and individual clients in connection with a broad array of complex government investigations, prosecutions and civil disputes.

Bill also has served as a member of the Criminal Justice Act Panel for the District Court for the Southern District of New York.

From 2003 to 2007, Bill served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York and prosecuted tax fraud, money laundering, bank fraud, mail fraud and wire fraud cases, among others. He tried numerous cases to successful jury verdicts and argued cases before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

Photo of Timothy W. Mungovan Timothy W. Mungovan

Tim Mungovan is the Chair of Proskauer.  He is also the immediate past chair of the Firm’s Litigation Department and head of the Securities Litigation practice.

His practice is focused on securities, commercial litigation, governance, and bankruptcy-related matters. He has a national reputation…

Tim Mungovan is the Chair of Proskauer.  He is also the immediate past chair of the Firm’s Litigation Department and head of the Securities Litigation practice.

His practice is focused on securities, commercial litigation, governance, and bankruptcy-related matters. He has a national reputation for advising sponsors of private investment funds (hedge, private equity, private credit and venture capital) in a wide variety of matters, including litigation, governance, securities, fiduciary obligations, and regulatory enforcement.

Chambers USA describes Tim as “an extraordinary lawyer who is a fierce and very talented litigator. He is extremely knowledgeable, responsive and client-oriented.” Best Lawyers in America lauds Tim’s experience, integrity, work ethic, communications and courtroom skills. Tim has been listed in the “Top 100 Lawyers” in Massachusetts, and Benchmark Litigation has continually recognized Tim as a Litigation Star in Massachusetts.

Over the last six years, Tim has been the lead litigator representing the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico in the historic restructuring of Puerto Rico’s debts. The scale and complexity of this restructuring has resulted in one of the most active litigation dockets in the U.S. Almost every aspect of the litigation involved matters of first impression in part because the restructuring is governed by the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act, which was enacted for Puerto Rico in 2016.  The track record of success speaks for itself:  in the more than 150 lawsuits filed, Tim and the Proskauer team have prevailed in almost 95% of the cases.

Tim is recognized nationally for his experience in private fund litigation and disputes, having focused on the industry for more than 25 years.  As part of that focus, Tim created and is the lead editor of Proskauer’s blog on Private Equity litigation, The Capital Commitment.

Photo of Dorothy Murray Dorothy Murray

Dorothy Murray is a partner in the Litigation Department specializing in investment and commercial dispute resolution. She supports clients across a wide range of sectors, including financial services, asset management/private equity, energy, telecoms, and maritime.

Dorothy represents clients in disputes arising from all…

Dorothy Murray is a partner in the Litigation Department specializing in investment and commercial dispute resolution. She supports clients across a wide range of sectors, including financial services, asset management/private equity, energy, telecoms, and maritime.

Dorothy represents clients in disputes arising from all aspects of their business, whether those disputes are post M&A, shareholder, employment, contractual, partnership or JV related.

Dorothy has experience managing litigation in common and civil law jurisdictions, and in commercial and investor state arbitration.  She is fluent with all the key divisions of the English High Courts and major arbitral institutional rules, including LCIA, ICC, LMAA, SCC, ISCID and UNICTRAL.  One of her particular interests is in the enforcement of arbitral awards.

In addition to representation in contentious matters, she uses her disputes experience to support clients at the transaction and pre‑action stages, working with companies and funds to identify, understand and mitigate personal and corporate liabilities and risks.

Photo of Joshua M. Newville Joshua M. Newville

Joshua M. Newville is a partner in the Litigation Department and a member of Proskauer’s White Collar Defense & Investigations Group and the Asset Management Litigation team.

Josh handles securities litigation, enforcement and regulatory matters, representing corporations and senior executives in civil and…

Joshua M. Newville is a partner in the Litigation Department and a member of Proskauer’s White Collar Defense & Investigations Group and the Asset Management Litigation team.

Josh handles securities litigation, enforcement and regulatory matters, representing corporations and senior executives in civil and criminal investigations. In addition, Josh advises registered investment advisers and private fund managers on regulatory compliance, SEC exams, MNPI/insider trading and related risks.

Before joining Proskauer, Josh was senior counsel in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division of Enforcement, where he investigated and prosecuted violations of the federal securities laws. Josh served in the Enforcement Division’s Asset Management Unit, a specialized unit focusing on investment advisers and the asset management industry. His prior experience with the SEC provides a unique perspective to help asset managers manage risk and handle regulatory issues.

Photo of Todd J. Ohlms Todd J. Ohlms

Todd J. Ohlms is as a partner in the Litigation department and a member of the Asset Management Litigation Group. Todd has represented clients in business-critical litigation matters for over 25 years, and has tried several cases to verdict before juries and the…

Todd J. Ohlms is as a partner in the Litigation department and a member of the Asset Management Litigation Group. Todd has represented clients in business-critical litigation matters for over 25 years, and has tried several cases to verdict before juries and the bench. He has also participated in numerous arbitration proceedings, including counseling clients regarding disputes subject to international arbitration agreements.

Todd is often retained by private equity firms to counsel them and their portfolio companies on a wide range of matters and is frequently chosen to serve as outside general counsel to their portfolio companies. He also represents family offices in disputes related to their operating companies where sensitive and complex relationships often play as large a role in determining the result as the actual legal theories at issue.

Photo of Robert Pommer Robert Pommer

Robert W. Pommer III is a partner in the Litigation Department and a member of Proskauer’s Securities Litigation, White Collar Defense & Investigations groups and the Asset Management Litigation team.

Bob’s practice focuses on a broad range of securities-related enforcement and compliance issues.

Robert W. Pommer III is a partner in the Litigation Department and a member of Proskauer’s Securities Litigation, White Collar Defense & Investigations groups and the Asset Management Litigation team.

Bob’s practice focuses on a broad range of securities-related enforcement and compliance issues. He represents private fund managers, financial institutions, public companies, and their senior executives in enforcement investigations and litigation conducted by the SEC, the U.S. Department of Justice, and other governmental entities and financial services regulators. He also conducts internal investigations and counsels investment advisers and public companies on regulatory compliance, corporate governance and other SEC-related issues.

Prior to his career in private practice, Bob served as Assistant Chief Litigation Counsel in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement for nine years. While there, he investigated and litigated several high-profile cases involving complex financial fraud and audit failures. Bob also worked on enforcement actions involving insider trading, investment adviser and broker-dealer issues, market manipulation and other violations of the federal securities laws.

Photo of Seetha Ramachandran Seetha Ramachandran

Seetha Ramachandran is a partner in the Litigation Department, and a member of the White Collar and Asset Management Litigation practices. An experienced trial and appellate lawyer, Seetha has conducted 10 criminal jury trials, argued 10 appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals…

Seetha Ramachandran is a partner in the Litigation Department, and a member of the White Collar and Asset Management Litigation practices. An experienced trial and appellate lawyer, Seetha has conducted 10 criminal jury trials, argued 10 appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and handled ancillary civil proceedings in forfeiture cases.

Seetha is a leading expert in anti-money laundering (AML), Bank Secrecy Act, economic sanctions and asset forfeiture matters. Her practice focuses on white collar and regulatory enforcement defense, internal investigations, and compliance counseling. She represents banks, broker dealers, hedge funds, private equity funds, online payment companies, and individual executives and officers in high stakes and sensitive matters. Seetha has deep experience representing institutions and individuals in financial penalty phase of criminal and regulatory matters, and is often retained to litigate forfeiture and restitution claims on behalf of victims and third parties in criminal cases, as well as handling these issues for individual defendants.

Seetha served as a federal prosecutor for nearly 10 years, including as Deputy Chief in the Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section (AFMLS), Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice. She was the first head of DOJ’s Money Laundering & Bank Integrity Unit, where she supervised DOJ’s first major AML prosecutions, and oversaw all of the Criminal Division’s AML cases. In that role, Seetha coordinated closely with state and federal banking regulators, including FinCEN, the OCC and the New York State Department of Financial Services, giving her deep experience with how these agencies work together, especially in matters involving civil and criminal liability. Her work developing and charging criminal cases under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) formed the model for AML enforcement that regulators and prosecutors follow today.

Seetha also served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York for nearly six years, in the Complex Frauds, Major Crimes and Asset Forfeiture units where she investigated and prosecuted white-collar cases involving a wide range of financial crimes, including bank fraud, mail and wire fraud, tax fraud, money laundering, stolen art and cultural property, and civil and criminal forfeiture cases.

Seetha is a frequent speaker and prolific author on topics including enforcement trends in the financial services industry, OFAC sanctions, effective AML programs and asset forfeiture.

Photo of Robert Sutton Robert Sutton

Robert is a partner of the Private Funds Group and a member of the Corporate Department. He is a seasoned practitioner with over 20 years of experience counseling managers and advisers of private funds on regulatory matters, as well as regulatory issues related…

Robert is a partner of the Private Funds Group and a member of the Corporate Department. He is a seasoned practitioner with over 20 years of experience counseling managers and advisers of private funds on regulatory matters, as well as regulatory issues related to the formation and operation of private equity, credit, real estate, infrastructure, hedge and other private funds.

Rob has a deep knowledge of the market practice of asset managers and in particular, as it relates to Advisers Act-related issues. From some of the largest and most sophisticated firms in the global asset management industry to start-ups and mid-sized firms, Rob’s experience includes a wide spectrum of funds and asset classes across their life cycles. Rob regularly advises on matters in connection with: U.S. investment adviser registration and regulation; Advisers Act and other U.S. securities law issues relating to the formation, marketing and offering of private funds; Identifying and managing conflicts of interest, and addressing related Advisers Act risks, SEC examinations, and exam readiness preparation; Design and implementation of investment adviser compliance policies and procedures; U.S. regulatory issues relating to purchases and sales of investment advisory businesses (minority stake and control stake transactions, buy-side and sell-side representations); Advisers Act and other U.S. regulatory issues relating to private fund restructurings and recapitalizations, strip sales, continuation fund formations and similar transactions; Advisers Act issues relating to the formation of SPACs by investment advisers; and, Investment Company Act status analyses of private fund structures, investment transaction structures and other non-registered investment company structures.

Rob has been recognized by his clients and peers for his extraordinary work, gaining various accolades including mentions in preeminent directories such as The Legal 500.  He is also very active within the private funds industry, contributing to numerous publications and collaborating on several speaking engagements.

Prior to joining Proskauer, Rob was a partner in the Investment Funds Group at Kirkland & Ellis.

Photo of John Verwey John Verwey

John Verwey is a partner in the Private Funds Group. John advises on a wide number of regulatory issues at a national UK and European level, including firm authorisations, appointed representative arrangements, change in control, market abuse. He represents a variety of clients…

John Verwey is a partner in the Private Funds Group. John advises on a wide number of regulatory issues at a national UK and European level, including firm authorisations, appointed representative arrangements, change in control, market abuse. He represents a variety of clients that range from small start-up fund managers to established global fund advisers and managers.

A particular area of focus for John is Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD) and Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (MiFID II).  This includes advising on pre-marketing and marketing strategies for fund managers, advising on the Level One and Lever Two requirements under AIFMD and implementing UK rules and legislation, and advising on the organizational and conduct of business requirements under MiFID II.

Photo of Jonathan M. Weiss Jonathan M. Weiss

Jonathan Weiss is a partner in the Litigation Department. Jonathan represents both plaintiffs and defendants in a wide range of high-stakes litigation, including antitrust, class action, financial services, securities and other complex commercial litigation. Jonathan has won multiple noteworthy jury verdicts, including the…

Jonathan Weiss is a partner in the Litigation Department. Jonathan represents both plaintiffs and defendants in a wide range of high-stakes litigation, including antitrust, class action, financial services, securities and other complex commercial litigation. Jonathan has won multiple noteworthy jury verdicts, including the fourth largest jury award in the history of the State of Arizona (over $110 million), and has significant appellate experience briefing and arguing appeals in both state and federal courts across the nation.

Jonathan has been recognized as a “Rising Star” by Southern California Super Lawyers every year since 2011, and was recognized by Legal 500 U.S. in their 2015 leading lawyers in appellate litigation edition, noting his “incredibly dedicated” advocacy on behalf of his clients. Jonathan has also spent considerable time on pro bono matters, for which he has been honored by Public Counsel among other organizations.

In addition to his busy practice, Jonathan has taught courses on Ninth Circuit appellate advocacy throughout Southern California and has lectured at several universities nationally, including Harvard Law School, UCLA Law School, the University of Illinois and the University of Pittsburgh. Jonathan is also a member of the Pacific Council on International Policy.

Photo of Julia Alonzo Julia Alonzo

Julia Alonzo is a senior counsel in the Litigation Department with a focus on securities and corporate governance litigation. She is experienced in complex civil securities matters and parallel proceedings, including federal securities class actions, shareholder derivative lawsuits, internal investigations, and SEC investigations.

Julia Alonzo is a senior counsel in the Litigation Department with a focus on securities and corporate governance litigation. She is experienced in complex civil securities matters and parallel proceedings, including federal securities class actions, shareholder derivative lawsuits, internal investigations, and SEC investigations. In addition, Julia has represented numerous companies facing litigation relating to pending M&A transactions. Julia is also a member of Proskauer’s Asset Management Litigation team.

Julia writes on topics relating to all aspects of civil securities litigation. She regularly updates a definitive treatise on shareholder derivative law, Shareholder Derivative Litigation: Besieging the Board. She is also the co-editor of Proskauer’s Corporate Defense & Disputes blog, which focuses on federal securities litigation, as well as the Minding Your Business blog on commercial litigation.

Julia maintains an active pro bono practice, with a focus on asylum, child welfare issues, and housing law.

Photo of Charles Bishop Charles Bishop

Charles Bishop is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the firm’s Asset Management Litigation group. Charles’ practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, supporting a range of asset-management, technology and fund clients. He has recently handled a complex fund GP…

Charles Bishop is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the firm’s Asset Management Litigation group. Charles’ practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, supporting a range of asset-management, technology and fund clients. He has recently handled a complex fund GP removal and its consequential cross-border litigation, several earn-out disputes and matters in the London Employment Tribunal.

Charles also maintains an active pro bono practice, providing legal services to charities / NGOs on employment matters and human rights.

Charles is admitted as a solicitor in England & Wales. He is also a member of the Civil Litigation Section of the Law Society of England & Wales, and the Financial Services Lawyers Association.

Photo of Massimo B. Capizzi Massimo B. Capizzi

Max Capizzi is an associate in the Litigation Department.

Max earned his J.D., cum laude, from the University of Michigan Law School, where he was a senior editor of the Michigan Law Review and a teaching assistant for the first-year legal writing…

Max Capizzi is an associate in the Litigation Department.

Max earned his J.D., cum laude, from the University of Michigan Law School, where he was a senior editor of the Michigan Law Review and a teaching assistant for the first-year legal writing program. While in law school, Max interned at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and participated in Michigan’s Civil-Criminal Litigation Clinic. Max holds a B.A., magna cum laude, from Georgetown University.

Photo of William D. Dalsen William D. Dalsen

Will Dalsen is a senior counsel in the Litigation Department. His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, with a particular emphasis on private credit, private equity, venture capital and hedge funds. Will is highly regarded for his deep knowledge of the private credit…

Will Dalsen is a senior counsel in the Litigation Department. His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, with a particular emphasis on private credit, private equity, venture capital and hedge funds. Will is highly regarded for his deep knowledge of the private credit fund industry and ability to resolve disputes for both sponsors and portfolio companies. He provides counseling regarding creditor rights, lender liability, sponsor liability, operating company disputes, control rights and regulatory compliance and investigations.

He advises funds, fund sponsors, investment advisers, and institutional and individual investors. In addition, he has represented public and private corporations in contractual disputes, business tort cases, and government investigations.

Will leads all phases of the litigation process, including pre-suit investigations, negotiating discovery disputes and arguing discovery motions, managing expert discovery, preparing and arguing dispositive motions, and preparing witnesses for trial. He has elicited deposition testimony from numerous witnesses on topics ranging from corporate finances to document preservation.

Prior to joining Proskauer, Will served for two years as a law clerk to Judge Susan Phillips Read of the New York State Court of Appeals, drafting bench memoranda and assisting with opinions in a variety of civil and criminal matters. In law school, Will was Editor in Chief of the Wisconsin Law Review and served as a judicial intern to the Honorable Shirley S. Abrahamson, Chief Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

Photo of Adam L. Deming Adam L. Deming

Adam Deming is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the firm’s Appellate and Product Liability groups, and Asset Management Litigation team. He focuses on complex commercial litigation in federal and state courts, covering a broad spectrum of business disputes…

Adam Deming is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the firm’s Appellate and Product Liability groups, and Asset Management Litigation team. He focuses on complex commercial litigation in federal and state courts, covering a broad spectrum of business disputes touching on corporate governance, fiduciary obligations, financial services, securities and insolvency. Adam has also represented clients in appeals spanning various areas, including consumer products, life sciences, bankruptcy, labor relations, patent and constitutional law.

Prior to joining Proskauer, Adam served as a law clerk to the Honorable Patty Shwartz on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Adam was also an associate in the New York office of an international law firm. Adam graduated cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania Law School, where he was the managing editor of the Journal of Constitutional Law and an Arthur C. Littleton Fellow instructor in legal writing.  Before law school, Adam was a Teach for America Corps Member in New Orleans, Louisiana, where he taught middle school English for three years.

Photo of Reut N. Samuels Reut N. Samuels

Reut is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the Antitrust Practice and Asset Management Groups. During her time at the firm, she spent a five-month secondment working pro bono for the City of New York in the Torts Division…

Reut is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the Antitrust Practice and Asset Management Groups. During her time at the firm, she spent a five-month secondment working pro bono for the City of New York in the Torts Division, Special Litigation Unit.

Reut earned her J.D. from New York University School of Law and her B.S. from Cornell University. During law school, she worked at the US Attorney’s Office, Criminal Division in the Southern District of New York, as well as at the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. Reut served as an Articles Editor for the Journal of Legislation and Public Policy.

Photo of Michael Singh Michael Singh

Michael is an associate in the Private Funds Group in the Corporate Department.

Michael advises clients on a variety of regulatory issues both from a UK and European perspective. He also helps clients on fund related transactions. His clients include private equity firms…

Michael is an associate in the Private Funds Group in the Corporate Department.

Michael advises clients on a variety of regulatory issues both from a UK and European perspective. He also helps clients on fund related transactions. His clients include private equity firms, investment managers, FinTech companies and wealth management businesses.

He is dual-qualified as a German lawyer (“Rechtsanwalt”) and Solicitor of England and Wales and previously was in-house counsel at Deutsche Bank.

Photo of Hena M. Vora Hena M. Vora

Hena M. Vora is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the Asset Management Litigation practice and Products Liability group. Her practice encompasses a range of complex civil and commercial litigation matters, including securities litigation, partnership disputes, and consumer products.…

Hena M. Vora is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the Asset Management Litigation practice and Products Liability group. Her practice encompasses a range of complex civil and commercial litigation matters, including securities litigation, partnership disputes, and consumer products.

Hena has experience with various stages of litigation, including pitching clients, coordinating discovery, drafting dispositive motions and trial memoranda, and preparing witnesses for depositions and trial. She also has experience conducting highly sensitive and confidential internal investigations.

Hena maintains an active pro bono practice and has been awarded for creating a partnership between Proskauer’s Boston office and Minds Matter Boston, through which she helps high school students from low-income backgrounds achieve college readiness and success.

Hena earned her J.D. from Emory University School of Law, where she received the Pro Bono Publico honor and a Transactional Law Certificate. In addition, she was a national competitor on the Moot Court Society and served as president of Emory’s South Asian Law Students Association. While at Emory, Hena served as judicial intern for Judge Denny Chin at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.