Company Counsel Sharing Investigation Findings with DOJ To Maximize Cooperation Credit and Minimize Risk of Waiving Privilege

Jennifer L. Achilles
Jennifer L. Achilles
Blank Rome

Jennifer Achilles focuses her practice on white collar criminal defense, regulatory enforcement and securities litigation, and internal investigations.

Linda Imes
Linda Imes
Blank Rome

Linda Imes has been a criminal and civil litigator for over three decades, with substantial trial and appellate experience. She focuses on white collar criminal defense, regulatory investigations and proceedings (including securities enforcement defense), and complex civil litigation.

Live Video-Broadcast: November 19, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

Full Cooperation Credit Now Comes with a Privilege Price Tag

On March 10, 2026, the Department of Justice announced a new Corporate Enforcement Policy. It makes cooperation credit contingent upon attributing facts to specific sources. That sits in direct tension with DOJ's No Request Rule, which directs prosecutors not to request privilege waivers. Companies must now weigh cooperation credit against the risk of waiving attorney-client privilege and work-product protection.

The exposure starts in the interview room. Draft the memo carelessly, and it may have to be disclosed in future proceedings. Leave AI note-takers, recordings, and drafts unmanaged, and they raise the same question. Deliver a witness-by-witness download, and you can trigger waiver. Rely on a confidentiality agreement, and protection turns on which federal circuit you are in. Then third parties come asking, in follow-on civil litigation, criminal prosecutions of individuals, and insurance coverage cases.

You walk out with a working framework for separating facts from communications and fact from opinion work product under Upjohn v. United States and Hickman v. Taylor. You also leave with do’s and don’ts for drafting interview memos and a strategy for meeting the attribution demand while maintaining privilege. Finally, you get best practices for opposing the waiver motion that follows.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • DOJ's Attribution Demand
    Reconcile DOJ's No Request Rule with the March 2026 Corporate Enforcement Policy's demand for attribution of facts to specific sources before deciding to cooperate.
  • Facts, Communications, Work Product
    Apply Upjohn v. United States and Hickman v. Taylor to separate unprotected facts from privileged communications, and fact work product from opinion work product.
  • Drafting Interview Memos
    Use concrete do’s and don’ts, including how to handle AI note-takers, recordings, and drafts, to keep interview memos protected in future proceedings.
  • Selective Waiver Circuit Map
    Map how the various federal circuits treat selective waiver and scope of waiver, and when a nonwaiver letter or confidentiality agreement with the Government helps.
  • Cooperating Without Waiver
    Disclose investigation results in a way that maximizes cooperation credit without delivering the witness-by-witness download that can trigger waiver.
  • Defending Follow-On Motions
    Defend privilege over investigation materials when follow-on civil litigation, individual prosecutions, or insurance coverage cases bring a subpoena or motion to compel.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: November 19, 2026 

  • 12:00 pm – 2:10 pm Eastern
  • 11:00 am – 1:10 pm Central
  • 10:00 am – 12:10 pm Mountain
  • 9:00 am – 11:10 am Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Jennifer L. Achilles, Partner | Blank Rome

Jennifer Achilles focuses her practice on white collar criminal defense, regulatory enforcement and securities litigation, and internal investigations.

Jennifer defends public and private companies, as well as their officers and directors, in government investigations by the Securities and Exchange     Commission (“SEC”), Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), Department of Justice (“DOJ”), and New York District Attorney’s (“DA”) and Attorney General’s (“AG”) offices. She has significant experience representing clients in matters involving insider trading, market manipulation, accounting fraud, cryptocurrency-related activities, anti-money laundering, and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”). She also leads internal investigations in advance of and in connection with government investigations, and counsels clients on cooperation and self-disclosure strategies. Jennifer leads Blank Rome’s internal working group on cryptocurrency enforcement.

  • Education & Credentials

Jennifer earned her A.B. from Vassar College, her M.S. from Yale University, and her J.D., magna cum laude, Order of the Coif, from Tulane University School of Law. She is admitted to practice in New York and before the U.S. District Courts for the District of Colorado, the Central District of California, and the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York, as well as the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Chambers USA reported that clients say that “Jennifer is a fantastic lawyer. She is strategic, knowledgeable and very experienced. She is reliable, responsive and adheres to deadlines.”

2026, “Litigation Star,” listed in Benchmark Litigation

2024–2026, Litigation: White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations, listed in Chambers USA

2026, listed in The Legal 500 United States

2026, “Leading Global Investigations Lawyers,” listed in Lawdragon

2016–2025, Criminal Defense: White Collar, listed in New York Metro Super Lawyers

2016, “Client Service All-Star,” listed by BTI Consulting Group

2013–2014, “Rising Star” for Criminal Defense: White Collar, listed in New York Metro Super Lawyers

  • Professional Involvement

Jennifer is a Board Member of Day One New York, a non-profit organization dedicated to ending dating violence. She also volunteers with the Schools Consent Project in New York City and is an active member of the Alumnae/i Association of Vassar College.

She is a member of the Women’s White Collar Defense Association, the Federal Bar Council, the New York City Bar Association, and the New York Women’s Bar Association.

  • Experience

Jennifer is frequently called upon to speak at industry events and write for leading publications. Prior to joining Blank Rome, she led the Global Regulatory Enforcement Group of an Am Law 100 firm in New York City and practiced at a boutique litigation firm focused on high-profile white collar and regulatory matters and sophisticated business disputes.

 

Linda Imes, Partner and Co-Chair, White Collar Defense & Investigations Practice Group | Blank Rome

Linda Imes has been a criminal and civil litigator for over three decades, with substantial trial and appellate experience. She focuses on white collar criminal defense, regulatory investigations and proceedings (including securities enforcement defense), and complex civil litigation.

Early in her career, Linda was a federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York. There, she served in the Major Crimes Unit and the Securities and Commodities Fraud Unit prosecuting a wide variety of complex business and commercial crimes including tax evasion, money laundering, transportation of stolen property, bank fraud, mail and wire fraud, and securities fraud.

  • Education & Credentials

Linda earned her B.S. and M.A., both with honors, from Northwestern University, and her J.D., cum laude, from Northwestern Pritzker School of Law. She is admitted to practice in New York and before the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York and the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Linda served as a law clerk for the Honorable John J. Gibbons, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Chambers and Partners recognizes Linda as a “Band 1” Leader in the Field of White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations. Sources quoted by Chambers praise Linda as “a trailblazer” and “one of the leaders of the Bar,” noting that she is “always outstanding in her representations” and “very focused and diligent,” with “excellent” judgment and “brain power and experience.”

In 2017, Linda received the Norman S. Ostrow Award from the New York Council of Defense Lawyers. The award, which is given annually, recognizes a lawyer for “outstanding contribution to the defense of liberty and the preservation of individual rights” and whose career has been “marked by numerous examples of a lawyer fighting for a client with vigor, dignity, and expertise.” In 2021, Chambers and Partners shortlisted Linda for its prestigious White-Collar Lawyer of the Year award.

2027, Thought Leader – Business Crime Defence – Individuals and Thought Leader Business Crime Defence – Corporates, listed in Lexology Index (formerly Who’s Who Legal)

2009–2026, Litigation: White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations, listed in Chambers USA

2026, “Highly Recommended – Business Crime Defence,” listed in Lexology Index

2026, listed in The Legal 500 United States

2026, “Leading Global Investigations Lawyers,” listed in Lawdragon

2023, Business Crime Defence – Individuals and Business Crime Defence – Corporates, listed in Who’s Who Legal

2023, USA and GIR Thought Leader Business Crime Defence – Individuals and Thought Leader Business Crime Defence – Corporates, listed in Who’s Who Legal

2021, White-Collar Lawyer of the Year Award Shortlist, by Chambers and Partners

2017, Norman S. Ostrow Award, New York Council of Defense Lawyers

  • Professional Involvement

Linda is a member of the Federal Bar Council, the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, and the New York Council of Defense Lawyers. She was a member of the Board of the New York Council of Defense Lawyers from 1997 through 1999 and from 2012 through 2014.

  • Experience

Linda has tried cases in federal court, before regulators, and to mediators. Linda has represented individuals and corporations in investigations by, and matters involving, numerous U.S. Attorney’s Offices, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), the New York State Attorney General’s Office and numerous other state Attorneys General, the District Attorney’s Office, the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and other governmental and regulatory bodies. Linda has experience representing individuals in connection with Congressional investigations and inquiries, including before the U.S. Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, and the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. Linda’s work frequently involves defending clients faced with more than one investigation at a time, often combined with civil litigation.

Linda has been involved in appellate advocacy since the beginning of her legal career when she clerked on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. While at the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Linda served as Deputy Chief of Appeals. In private practice, Linda has briefed and argued numerous cases in the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, New York’s Appellate Division, and the New York Court of Appeals.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – Knowing the Law on Fact versus Opinion Work Product, and Best Practices for Drafting Interview Memos | Linda Imes & Jennifer L. Achilles | 12:00pm – 1:00pm

The first hour begins by explaining the tension between the DOJ’s No Request Rule directing prosecutors not to request privilege waivers and the March 2026 corporate enforcement policy requiring fact attribution for full cooperation credit.  This hour will cover federal privilege law on facts versus communications under Upjohn v. United States (1981), and fact versus opinion work product under Hickman v. Taylor (1947) and their progeny. We will finish the hour by discussing best practices for drafting interview memos to protect them from having to be disclosed in future proceedings.

BREAK | 1:00pm – 1:10pm

SESSION 2 – Knowing the Law on Selective Waiver, Cooperating with DOJ, and Defending the Follow-On Waiver Motion | Linda Imes & Jennifer L. Achilles | 1:10pm – 2:10pm

The second hour covers the various federal circuits’ views on selective waiver, scope of waiver, and whether having a confidentiality agreement with the Government helps protect information provided to the Government. It covers the strategy that comes after the decision to cooperate: how to meet the March 2026 Corporate Enforcement Policy’s demand for “attribution of facts to specific sources” without delivering the kind of witness-by-witness download that can trigger waiver. It covers the potential ramifications of not protecting the privilege and the most common situations in which third parties seek privileged information created during an internal investigation (e.g., follow on civil litigation, criminal prosecutions of individuals, and insurance coverage cases).  We will also discuss best practices for defending a later motion to compel documents and information shared with the Government.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Florida

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 General Hours

Receive CLE credit in Florida via attorney submission.
Georgia

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Illinois

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Indiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

Oregon

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
2 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Washington

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours

Receive CLE credit in Washington via attorney submission.
Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
iPad for Lawyers: The Complete Mobile Practice Toolkit
iPad for Lawyers: The Complete Mobile Practice Toolkit Mon, October 26, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay
Using AI in Your Law Practice: A Step-by-Step Guide
Using AI in Your Law Practice: A Step-by-Step Guide Wed, October 28, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay
The AI Skills Every Attorney Needs: Think, Prompt, Win
The AI Skills Every Attorney Needs: Think, Prompt, Win Wed, October 28, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay
A, B, C’s of Revocable and Irrevocable Trusts
A, B, C’s of Revocable and Irrevocable Trusts Thu, October 29, 2026
On-Demand
Live Replay