Matthew J. PorporaPartner
Mr. Porpora’s recent practice has focused on representing a number of financial institutions in investigations and fending off related class actions concerning alleged benchmark interest rate-rigging and manipulation of commodities pricing. In the litigations, Mr. Porpora has successfully secured dismissal of various securities, antitrust, RICO, Commodity Exchange Act, and state law claims. For example, Mr. Porpora secured dismissal of all LIBOR-related claims against Barclays in an action in California federal court and successfully defended that dismissal before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and he secured dismissal of all claims against two different financial institution clients in a high-exposure class action concerning allegations of SIBOR and SOR manipulation. Mr. Porpora also has been playing a leading role in representing Fiat Chrysler Automobiles in defending against a class action advancing RICO, Consumer Protection Act, implied warranty, fraud and other state law claims concerning Fiat Chrysler Automobiles’ use of allegedly defective airbags.
Mr. Porpora clerked for the Honorable Nina Gershon of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York from 2006 to 2008.
- Barclays Bank, in the investigation and resolution with the DOJ, CFTC and the U.K. FSA of matters relating to LIBOR and Euribor.
- Barclays Bank, in investigations by various world-wide authorities and regulators concerning various foreign benchmark interest rates
- Numerous prominent financial institutions, including Barclays, BNP Paribas, Goldman Sachs & Co., ING Group, and others, in responding to investigations, subpoenas and inquiries from state and federal law authorities, including the DOJ, SEC, OFAC, CFTC, and DANY, in connection with regulatory investigations, internal investigations, subpoenas and sanctions advice.
- ABN AMRO Bank, ING Group, and Lloyds Bank, in the resolution of separate multiagency criminal and regulatory investigations into each of the foregoing institutions relating to their compliance with economic sanctions and/or anti-money laundering regulations.
- ING Group, in a civil victory dismissing a $4.9 billion federal RICO and fraudulent conveyance claim filed in the Southern District of New York in connection with ING’s conduct that was the subject of a $619 million criminal sanctions settlement that S&C had previously negotiated for ING, which was affirmed on appeal.
- Barclays Bank, in class and individual actions asserting claims related to Barclays’ resolution of the DOJ, CFTC and the U.K. FSA’s LIBOR- and Euribor-related investigations, including leading the defense of Barclays and its affiliates in the USD LIBOR multi-district litigation in the SDNY, the Yen LIBOR class action in SDNY, the Euribor class action in the SDNY, the GBP LIBOR class action in the SDNY, and other LIBOR-related actions in other federal courts across the country.
- Barclays Bank, in the U.S. class action and other matters related to alleged price fixing in the market for Mexican Government Bonds (In re Mexican Government Bonds Antitrust Litigation).
- National Australia Bank Limited, in a class action lawsuit involving the BBSW, in which it was alleged that NAB and other banks violated U.S. antitrust laws and the Commodity Exchange Act, as well as the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and various state laws.
- Barclays Bank and ING Group, in securing the dismissal of antitrust class actions alleging manipulation to the SIBOR, and SOR.
- Royal Bank of Canada and RBC Europe Limited, in defending against a class action lawsuit involving the trading of supranational, sovereign and agency bonds alleging violations of U.S. antitrust laws and state law claims.
- Adient plc, in a securities fraud class action brought by shareholders alleging that the company publicly misrepresented the state of a meaningful segment of its business, which is pending in SDNY.
- Barclays Bank, in successfully securing the dismissal of certain claims in a securities fraud class action brought by entities that purportedly traded financial instruments tied to LIBOR, and ultimately resolving the action on favorable terms.
- Directors of Enbridge Energy Partners, in a derivative suit brought in Texas state court arising out of the largest oil spill in the Midwest, which was dismissed with prejudice on a motion to dismiss.
- Goldman Sachs, in an action filed in August 2018 in SDNY, by a former managing director of the firm, alleging whistleblower and other claims.
- Barclays Bank, in successfully resolving employment-related whistleblower, breach of contract and indemnification claims brought by three former derivatives traders seeking payment of legal fees in connection with their U.K. criminal trial regarding alleged USD LIBOR-related conduct.
- Barclays Bank, against retaliatory claims of wrongful termination and age discrimination.