United States: Ninth Circuit Holds That Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Provisions Apply To Employees Who Internally Raise Concerns

On March 8, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled, in a 2-1 decision, to affirm a district court's denial of defendant-employer's motion to dismiss a whistleblower claim brought under the Dodd-Frank Act's ("Dodd-Frank") anti-retaliation provision. Wading into an issue that has already created a circuit split, the Ninth Circuit panel held that the term "whistleblower" extends protection to employees making internal disclosures of alleged unlawful activity, and does not limit protection under Dodd-Frank to employees reporting potential violations to the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC").1 The Ninth Circuit, adopting the broader approach of the Second Circuit rather than the Fifth Circuit's narrower interpretation,2 reasoned the congressional intent underlying the relevant Dodd-Frank provisions dictated there should be legal protection "for those who make internal disclosures as well as to those who make disclosures to the SEC."3

I. Background

Paul Somers, the Plaintiff-Appellee, was employed by Defendant-Appellant, Digital Realty Trust, Inc. ("Digital Realty") from 2010 to 2014. During that time, Somers made numerous reports to senior management alleging federal securities laws violations by Digital Realty. Shortly after he raised these concerns internally, and before he was able to make any report to the SEC, Digital Realty terminated Somers' employment. Following his firing, Somers sued Digital Realty, alleging violations of various state and federal laws, including Section 21F of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act"), which contains anti-retaliation provisions added by Dodd-Frank.

At the district court level, Digital Realty sought to dismiss the retaliation claim on the ground that Somers was not a "whistleblower" entitled to Dodd-Frank's protections because he merely reported possible violations internally and not to the SEC. The district court denied Digital Realty's motion to dismiss after conducting an analysis of the statutory text, Dodd-Frank's legislative history, and the practical implications of reconciling the narrow definition of "whistleblower" with the expansive protections created by the anti-retaliation provision.4 Somers argued that the court should defer to the SEC's interpretation of the provision conferring anti-retaliation protection under Dodd-Frank to a broader subset of individuals than merely those who report through official channels to the SEC.5 The district court, while acknowledging the difficulty in finding a "clear and simple way to read the statutory provisions of Section 21F in perfect harmony with one another," sided with Somers, finding that individuals who report internally are protected from retaliation under Dodd Frank.6

II. Ninth Circuit's Reasoning

The Ninth Circuit panel began its discussion by chronicling the contours of a robust twenty-first century financial regulatory framework it described as created specifically to curb securities abuses. To frame the case against this regulatory backdrop, the court focused on provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act ("SOX") including internal reporting requirements for lawyers, requirements for anonymous reporting avenues within corporate compliance regimes, and most importantly, whistleblower protections for employees. The court acknowledged SOX's express protections of those who lawfully provide information to federal agencies, Congress, or "a person with supervisory authority over the employee."7 With respect to Dodd-Frank, the court reasoned that, like SOX, the legislation was passed in the wake of a financial scandal with the primary aims of improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, and protecting consumers from abusive financial practices.8

As the court observed, Dodd-Frank created incentives and protections for whistleblowers by adding Section 21F to the Exchange Act. Unlike SOX, however, 21F defines a whistleblower as "any individual who provides . . . information relating to a violation of the securities laws to the Commission, in a manner established, by rule or regulation, by the Commission."9 On its face, this definition describes a whistleblower only as a person who reports information directly to the SEC. The issue in Somers arises out of a later subsection of Section 21F – specifically subdivision (iii) – wherein whistleblower protection extends to individuals who make any "required or protected" disclosure under SOX and all other relevant laws. Subdivision (iii) was added after the bill went through Committee, so there is no legislative history on it.

Although legislative history is not helpful, the Ninth Circuit found that the language of subdivision (iii) "illuminates congressional intent."10 The Ninth Circuit found that, by incorporating SOX's disclosure requirements and protections through subdivision (iii), Congress meant for Dodd-Frank to bar retaliation against an employee of a public company who "provide[s] information . . . to a person with supervisory authority over the employee."11 Citing a similar analysis from the Second Circuit, the Ninth Circuit drew attention to the "absurdities" potentially created by a different interpretation, explaining that, "if subdivision (iii) requires reporting to the [SEC], its express cross-reference to the provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley would afford an auditor almost no Dodd-Frank protection for retaliation because the auditor must await a company response to internal reporting before reporting to the Commission, and any retaliation would almost always precede Commission reporting."12 Even though Dodd-Frank's definition of "whistleblowers" is limited to those persons who report to the SEC, the Ninth Circuit posited that terms can have different operative consequences in different contexts, and therefore was comfortable accepting that the term "may mean a different thing in a different part, depending on context." The court stated that reading the use of the word "whistleblower" to incorporate the earlier, narrower definition of the Exchange Act would "make little practical sense" and "undercut congressional intent." Citing again to the Second Circuit's similar reasoning in Berman, the Ninth Circuit concluded that a strict application of Dodd-Frank's definition "would, in effect, all but read subdivision (iii) out of the statute."13 Furthermore, the court accorded deference to the SEC rules issued in 2011 that contain the more expansive definition of "whistleblower" and found that those rules reflected Congressional intent to provide broad whistleblower protection. With those bases, the court held that any employee who takes any action described in subdivisions (i), (ii), or (iii) of the anti-retaliation provision – including, by reference to SOX, reporting "to a person with supervisory authority over the employee"– is entitled to protection as a whistleblower. The Ninth Circuit concluded that the interpretation accurately reflects congressional intent that Dodd-Frank protect employees "whether they blow the whistle internally" or report directly to the SEC.14

III. Potential Implications

Digital Realty may seek an en banc rehearing from the Ninth Circuit or, alternatively, seek review in the Supreme Court. Further, other circuits may interpret Dodd-Frank more narrowly, as the Fifth Circuit has,15 rather than agree with the Second Circuit's and Ninth Circuit's broader interpretation.16 Regardless, the circuit split has already led the Supreme Court to accept certiorari in a case from the Sixth Circuit with similar facts.17


1 Somers v. Dig. Realty Tr. Inc., No. 15-17352, 4-5 (9th Cir. Mar. 8, 2017) ("Somers").

2 See Berman v. Neo@Ogilvy LLC, 801 F.3d 145, 151 (2d Cir. 2015) ("Berman"); Asadi v. G.E. Energy (USA), L.L.C., 720 F.3d 620 (5th Cir. 2013) ("Asadi").

3 Id.

4 Somers v. Dig. Realty Tr. Inc., 119 F. Supp. 3d 1088, 1100-05 (N.D. Cal. 2015).

5 Id. at 1104.

6 Id. at 1104-06.

7 18 U.S.C. § 1514A(a).

8 Pub. L. No. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376, 1376 (2010).

9 15 U.S.C. § 78u-6(a)(6).

10 Somers at 8.

11 Id.

12 Id at 9 citing Berman, 801 F.3d at 151.

13 Somers at 10.

14 Id at 12.

15 In Asadi, the Fifth Circuit held that Dodd-Frank's anti-retaliation provision requires a whistleblower to make a report to the SEC in order to be covered—merely filing an internal complaint (as Somers did) is insufficient. Asadi v. G.E. Energy (USA), L.L.C., 720 F.3d 620 (5th Cir. 2013).

16 In Somers, Circuit Judge Owens dissented from the majority's judgment, stating that he agreed with the Fifth Circuit's narrower interpretation of Dodd-Frank in Asadi.

17 In Verble v. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC et al., No. 15-6397 (6th Cir. 2017), the Sixth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a similar whistle-blower claim, though it did not decide the issue at question in Somers, instead holding that the plaintiff's claim was too vague for adjudication.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions