An examination of how US companies, including law firms, have responded to diversity and inclusion calls following the George Floyd death and growing social justice movement. How US Companies Have Responded to Calls for Equality, Inclusion and How Law Firms Can Follow Suit Open In the News Open July 21, 2021 6 minutes read Sequor Law Many of our country’s largest industries have made significant changes as a result of this increased awareness and outspokenness in regard to the systemic issues that underlie the failures in diversity at the leadership levels. By Harsh Arora | July 21, 2021 With the recent anniversary of the death of George Floyd and the conclusion of the trial and sentencing of Derek Chauvin that has dominated the national conversation, it is clear that the calls for racial equity and equality that have defined the past year will continue into the foreseeable future. Many of our country’s largest industries have made significant changes as a result of this increased awareness and outspokenness in regard to the systemic issues that underlie the failures in diversity at the leadership levels. Such organizations have responded by committing to both long-term and immediate initiatives in order to rectify their own institutional biases. While the lack of representation at the leadership and executive levels of our country’s largest and most recognizable companies is far from a novel issue, many companies have recently committed to diversity and inclusion efforts that have the potential to create real and lasting change due in large part to the increased pressure from shareholders and customers. Notably, these efforts go beyond previously broad responses; and instead, range from creating funds and investing in initiatives designed to expand opportunities and promote equality to disclosing previously private race, gender and ethnicity workforce data. It consequently has had a dual effect of helping identify underrepresented groups as well holding the reporting companies accountable. Although these investments and increased transparency are significant steps, it is also important to point out that diversity at the executive level at our nation’s largest companies still presents a significant challenge. For example, only about 10% of directors at the 200 biggest S&P 500 companies are Black and the percentage of Black executives joining boards has recently stagnated. There are many reasons for this lack of representation as there are systemic issues in relation to hiring practices and pools of candidates. While the investment initiatives in which many companies are engaging will increase the number of diverse applicants and help create more opportunities, many companies and their outside institutions are also taking more immediate steps in order to increase diversity. For example, since September 2020, at least 75 organizations have taken part in or have supported the Board Challenge to add a Black director within the next year and foster continued diversity efforts. Moreover, the NASDAQ recently filed a proposal with the SEC requiring any company with fewer than two diverse directors, including persons who self-identify as either an underrepresented minority or LGBTQ+, to provide a reasonable explanation as to why or risk being delisted. Even governments are getting involved as the State of California recently passed a law requiring publicly traded corporations headquartered in California to appoint directors from underrepresented communities to their boards. Despite the pendency of the NASDAQ proposal and likelihood of challenge to the California diversity law, these initiatives represent how organizations are responding to the consumer push for immediate and recognizable results. Accordingly, based on a report by BoardProspects, Black board members accounted for 18.5% of all new board appointments to Russell 3000 companies following George Floyd’s death. Moreover, 62% of all Black director appointments between 2019 and 2020 occurred after he died. As corporations and their related institutions pledge to do their part to promote diversity and racial equity, many companies and organizations have pressured the law firms that represent them to respond in kind. In general, the legal profession is often perceived as lagging behind other professions and industries in the area of diversity, particularly in leadership positions. This perception is backed by the most recent report from the National Association for Law Placement (NALP) which shows that while persons of color make up 25% of law firm associates, they make up less than 10% of partners. NALP described the progress toward diversity at law firms as steady and incremental but “so slow as to almost seem imperceptible.” Accordingly, more and more business owners and corporate executives are starting to notice that the lawyers and law firms hired to represent their interests do not resemble them demographically. This discrepancy, combined with the renewed commitment to addressing diversity issues, has led to increased and more comprehensive diversity requests from clients inquiring about how specifically law firms are supporting diverse attorneys. In response to these demands and client pressure, law firms have similarly spent the past year creating and investing in initiatives in order to confront their diversity issues. These initiatives include considering diversity and inclusion-related work as billable hours that will count toward bonus thresholds, creating mentorship programs for new associates in order to help increase retention and internal promotion, and more generally, expanding and improving recruiting efforts to reach more diverse candidates. In addition to the foregoing initiatives(much like the corporations they represent) law firms are being pushed by their clients for immediate actions and results. Accordingly, over 100 law firms have signed on to seek certification under the Mansfield Rule, which is overseen by the legal diversity organization, Diversity Lab and requires the consideration of at least 30% women, lawyers of color, LGBTQ+ lawyers, and lawyers with disabilities for leadership and governance roles, equity partner promotions, formal client pitch opportunities, and senior lateral positions. While this general push by the legal community is encouraging, many corporate lawyers and outside counsel are held to even a higher standard due to the polices of the companies they represent. This higher standard includes requiring law firms to implement policies and hire associates at rates that are tied to national census data. The most publicized proponent of this effort has been Coca-Cola, which earlier this year announced a policy requiring at least 30% of billed associate and partner time be from diverse attorneys; and stated that if firms fail to meet diversity requirements for two consecutive quarters, that it will cut 30% from the firm’s fees for new matters and possibly lead to losing Coca-Cola as a client. Since the announcement of this policy; however, its status has come into question as GC, Bradley Gayton who spearheaded the initiative, has recently stepped down and his replacement, Monica Howard Douglas, has reportedly told the legal team the policy had been paused. While this change disrupts the momentum that was created when Coca-Cola’s diversity policy was first announced, it has not stopped the overall corporate pressures on law firms to meet diversity criteria as just recently Nokia launched an equality, inclusion and diversity scorecard program to assess whether their key law firms are implementing an effective equality, inclusion and diversity strategy. While Nokia’s policy and others like it are not as forceful as the in-flux CocaCola policy, they represent how companies are holding their law firms accountable and mandating actual improvement in the areas of diversity and equality. Despite the foregoing, it is completely justifiable to be skeptical over the effectiveness of scorecards and surveys without the inclusion of concrete milestones and penalties; especially considering that this is not the first time corporations and general counsels have put pressure on law firms to increase diversity and inclusion efforts. In 2019, general counsels from more than 170 organizations similarly called on law firms to increase diversity and signed a letter that threatened to move on from outside counsel that do not try to hire and retain female and nonwhite attorneys. With diversity numbers at law firms in 2020 increasing slightly, but ultimately failing to signify significant improvement, the extent to which the GCs that signed the 2019 letter followed-up on their diversity demands is largely unknown. The difference between 2019 and the current movement and why the apparent demise of Coca-Cola’s forceful diversity policy is not a troublesome indicator; however; is that companies are still being pressured by consumers to have diversity metrics and executive suites that match the make-up of our country. As such, it is no longer acceptable for law firms to hold themselves accountable, as after a year of racial reckoning, clients and customers have now assumed that responsibility. This shift in accountability is already being felt in the legal community as the institutions that surround the legal industry are putting mechanisms in place to foster positive change. This is especially evident in Florida, with the diverse leadership within the Florida Bar business law section (BLS) and the recent initiatives of BLS. For the first time in its history, the BLS will have consecutive female chairs as Kacy Donlon was recently named chair-elect, following the current chair, Leyza B. Florin (the first Hispanic chair of BLS). As one of its initiatives, BLS set forth a new policy requiring a minimum number of diverse faculty at section sponsored continuing legal education programs. While the Florida Supreme Court ruled against this policy in April, it is yet another example of how the legal landscape, especially in connection with business law and corporate lawyers, is ready to be changed. Harsh Arora a partner with Kelley Kronenberg, P.A., in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and is the co-chair of firm’s diversity & inclusion committee. He focuses his practice on business litigation and serves as outside general counsel for public and privately held businesses. Contact him at harora@kklaw.com To see the original article, click here . Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Sequor Law's trial team, with Nyana Miller as second chair, wins a fraud and civil theft judgment for a client defrauded of 130 million Venezuelan bolivars worth approximately $8.6 million. Nyana Miller was second chair for a trial that resulted in a judgment for over $22 million in favor of Sequor’s client Open Case Results Open September 23, 2020 1 minute read Sequor Law The trial team proved that the defendant had wrongly taken money from Sequor’s client, under the guise of an offset against the debt of an unrelated party. The trial court ruled that the conduct amounted to fraud, civil theft and unjust enrichment. The trial team successfully argued that the defendant had not properly pled that the transaction was illegal and persuaded the judge to calculate the exchange rate as of the date of the loss, rather than the date of trial. The defendant had refused to repay 130 million Venezuelan bolivars to Sequor’s client, which was worth about US $8.6 million at the time. However, by the time the case went to trial, it was worth only US $2.30 because of Venezuela’s hyperinflation. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Who’s Who Legal recognizes Sequor Law founding shareholder Edward H. Davis, Jr. as a Thought Leader. He discusses boutique focus, asset recovery, and major Ponzi cases. Edward H. Davis, Jr., selected as a Who’s Who Legal Thought Leader Open Awards & Recognition Open November 30, 2017 4 minutes read Sequor Law Who’s Who Legal: Thought Leaders 2018 brings together the insight, expertise and wisdom of some of the world’s foremost lawyers in a single book. This year’s edition features Q&As with 67 eminent practitioners across 22 practice areas. These lawyers obtained the highest number of nominations from peers, corporate counsel and other market sources in our most recent research cycle. Edward H. Davis, Jr. Questions and Answers: Who’s Who Legal Thought Leaders: Asset Recovery Edward H Davis, Jr, a founding shareholder of the international law firm Astigarraga Davis, heads the firm’s asset recovery and financial fraud group which represents victims of serious fraud and grand corruption including governments, corporations, insolvency practitioners and individuals by investigating and prosecuting civil fraud and asset recovery actions. Who’s Who Legal: Asset Recovery has recognised Davis as the global Asset Recovery Lawyer of the Year from 2013 to 2016, and his firm as Asset Recovery Firm of the Year for 2015 and 2016. WHY DID YOU DECIDE TO SPECIALISE IN ASSET RECOVERY AND FRAUD WORK? I enjoy representing victims and helping them level the playing field with those that prey on them. As a result, I decided to focus my practice on the representation of individual, corporate and governmental victims of fraud throughout the world. I also enjoy learning about other legal cultures, and asset recovery and fraud work is a specialised form of international litigation. Lastly, I enjoy the “hunt” for those that have committed fraud and their ill-gotten gains. WHAT PROMPTED YOU TO FOUND YOUR OWN FIRM? My partners and I were seeking a better way to serve our clients in response to new factors in the industry affecting both the legal profession and our clients. Having a specialised boutique allows us to employ our “power of focus” concept and truly focus deeply on our practice groups and developments in the law to a degree that might not be attainable in a more generalised platform. Also, our boutique setting is nimbler and more cost-effective than that of many other firms, and allows us to take cases on alternative fee structures. WHAT MAKES FOR A SUCCESSFUL ASSET RECOVERY SPECIALIST? The actions taken in the first days following the discovery of a fraud often will determine whether the misappropriated funds or other property are ultimately recovered. Our team responds quickly to such fraud by using emergency injunctions, expedited depositions, subpoenas of bank records, our vast connections to experienced professionals and investigators around the world to seek to either locate the assets before they are dissipated or to investigate and bring claims against third parties who assisted the fraudsters. WHAT IS THE MOST MEMORABLE MATTER THAT YOU’VE WORKED ON TO DATE? Stanford International Bank, Ltd was an Antiguan bank that sold phony certificates of deposit to 21,000 depositors, which resulted in the second-largest Ponzi scheme in history by causing losses to over 27,000 depositor-victims from around the world. Estimated losses by depositor-victims exceeded $5 billion. WHAT CHALLENGES ARE FACING PRACTITIONERS AT THE MOMENT AND HOW IS YOUR FIRM LOOKING TO MEET THESE OBSTACLES? The pressure from clients to keep legal fees and costs as low as possible continues to be one of the challenges affecting practitioners. This can be a problem because of the crisis-like atmosphere in which successful asset recovery practitioners function. We combat these challenges by working closely with investigators, computer forensic experts, foreign lawyers, forensic accountants, law enforcement and other experts. These professionals are key resources in a rapid response to a discovered fraud which can lead to escalated costs (such as cost bonds) which would not be the norm in another practice area. Our firm has been meeting this particular challenge by offering alternative fee arrangements when historically the standard was solely hourly fee billing, and by working with litigation funders that assist victims of fraud who usually don’t have the resources to fight the fraudster after the fraud. DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY’S INCREASING READINESS TO TACKLE CORRUPTION WILL LEAD TO GROWING INTEREST IN ASSET RECOVERY WORK IN THE WIDER LEGAL MARKET? Yes, as technology continues to get more sophisticated, the speed of the movement of money throughout the world will likewise increase. This, combined with a growing awareness that national borders are no more an impediment to recovery than they are to the fraudster who moves across those same borders, will likely result in the interest in asset recovery work growing into a larger distinct legal market. We already see firms forming asset recovery departments and groups which is a signal that that the market is recognising this distinct practice area as an exciting new offering to their clients. HOW IMPORTANT ARE ORGANISATIONS SUCH THE ICC COMMERCIAL CRIMES SERVICES’ FRAUDNET NETWORK IN INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECOVERY WORK? Organizations like the ICC’s FraudNet are very important and necessary in the international asset recovery work. Fraudsters work using their own networks of cronies and those that provide them assistance – legal and otherwise. So it is essential that counter-networks operate at a high level of coordination to defeat them. They also are powerful change agents that raise awareness and educate fraud victims worldwide about the methods that can be deployed to assist them in their fight to recover their assets and damages. AS HEAD OF THE FIRM’S ASSET RECOVERY AND FINANCIAL FRAUD PRACTICE, IN WHAT WAYS ARE YOU ATTEMPTING TO DISTINGUISH YOUR GROUP FROM OTHER COMPETITORS IN THE MARKET? I work on creating innovative solutions. I’ve helped develop and expand various creative discovery and asset seizure methodologies to obtain recoveries for our clients. Additionally, I’ve both led and worked collaboratively on various civil asset recovery teams – another concept I helped pioneer – on cross-border asset recovery engagements. Having a strong commercial litigation and insolvency background, my team and I have championed and coordinated asset recovery efforts between civil and criminal systems as a means to penetrate and defeat complex opaque asset hiding structures used by fraudsters. I was recently mentioned by Latin Lawyer (2016) for my efforts in the area of asset recovery. Lastly, as a result of our efforts, I was also recognised as the global Asset Recovery Lawyer of the Year by Who’s Who Legal: Asset Recovery, in 2013 (and again in 2014, 2015 and 2016); my firm was recognised as the Asset Recovery Firm of the Year in 2015 and 2016 by the same publication. View PDF Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

1. Introduction This Cookie Policy explains how Sequor Law ("Sequor Law," "we," "us," or "our") uses cookies and similar tracking technologies on our website located at https://www.sequorlaw.com (the "Website"). This Cookie Policy should be read in conjunction with our Privacy Policy, which provides further information about how we collect and use personal data. By using our Website and consenting to the placement of cookies through our cookie consent banner, you agree to the use of cookies as described in this policy. 2. What Are Cookies? Cookies are small text files that are placed on your device (computer, tablet, or mobile phone) when you visit a website. Cookies are widely used to make websites work more efficiently, to provide information to website owners, and to enable certain features and functionalities. Cookies can be "first-party" (set by the website you are visiting) or "third-party" (set by a domain other than the one you are visiting). Cookies can also be "session" cookies (which are deleted when you close your browser) or "persistent" cookies (which remain on your device for a set period or until you delete them). 3. How We Use Cookies We use cookies on our Website primarily for analytics purposes, specifically to understand how visitors interact with our Website so that we can improve its content, functionality, and user experience. We use Google Analytics 4 ("GA4") as our web analytics service. We do not use cookies for advertising or targeted marketing purposes. We do not use third-party advertising cookies or cross-site tracking cookies. 4. Types of Cookies We Use 4.1 Strictly Necessary Cookies These cookies are essential for the operation of our Website. They enable basic functions such as page navigation and access to secure areas of the Website. The Website cannot function properly without these cookies, and they cannot be disabled. Strictly necessary cookies do not require your consent. 4.2 Analytics / Performance Cookies These cookies allow us to measure and analyze how visitors use our Website, including which pages are visited most often, how visitors navigate the site, and whether visitors encounter error messages. The information collected by these cookies is aggregated and used to improve the performance and user experience of our Website. These cookies require your consent, which is obtained through our cookie consent banner. 5. Specific Cookies Used on This Website The following table details the specific cookies set on our Website: Note: Browser policies may further limit cookie durations. For example, Safari limits first-party cookie expiration to seven (7) days, and Chrome limits them to approximately four hundred (400) days, regardless of the expiration set by the cookie. Additionally, GA4 server-side data retention is configured to fourteen (14) months, after which user-level and event-level data is automatically deleted regardless of cookie lifespan. 6. Cookie Consent When you first visit our Website, you will be presented with a cookie consent banner that provides you with the option to accept or decline analytics cookies. Strictly necessary cookies will be set regardless of your choice, as they are essential for the Website to function. Analytics cookies will not be placed on your device until you have affirmatively consented through the cookie consent banner. If you decline analytics cookies, Google Analytics will not track your visit. We implement Google Consent Mode v2, which adjusts the behavior of Google tags based on your consent preferences. When consent is not granted, GA4 may still collect limited, cookieless pings that are used for aggregate modeling purposes only and do not include personally identifiable information. 7. Managing Your Cookie Preferences You can manage your cookie preferences in the following ways: Cookie Consent Banner: You may change your cookie preferences at any time by clicking the cookie settings link available in the footer of our Website, which will re-display the cookie consent banner. Browser Settings: Most web browsers allow you to control cookies through their settings. You can set your browser to refuse all cookies, accept all cookies, or notify you when a cookie is being set. The specific steps to manage cookies vary by browser. Please consult your browser’s help documentation for instructions. Opt-Out Tools: You may opt out of Google Analytics tracking by installing the Google Analytics Opt-out Browser Add-on, available at https://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout. Please note that disabling cookies may affect the functionality of our Website and your ability to access certain features. 8. Email Tracking Technologies In addition to website cookies, our newsletter emails (distributed through HubSpot) may contain tracking pixels (also known as web beacons or clear GIFs). These are small, transparent images embedded in the email that allow us to determine whether an email has been opened and which links within the email were clicked. The information collected through email tracking pixels may include your IP address at the time of opening, your email client and device information, and the date and time of the interaction. This data is used to measure the effectiveness of our email communications and to improve the content we provide. For further details, please refer to our Privacy Policy. 9. Third-Party Cookies and Data Transfers The analytics cookies used on our Website are set by Google Analytics (a service provided by Google LLC). Google may process the data collected by these cookies on servers located in the United States or other countries. Google’s use of this data is governed by Google’s Privacy Policy (https://policies.google.com/privacy). For visitors in the European Economic Area (EEA), the United Kingdom (UK), or Switzerland, Google relies on Standard Contractual Clauses and other approved transfer mechanisms to ensure an adequate level of data protection when transferring data outside the EEA/UK. 10. Changes to This Cookie Policy We may update this Cookie Policy from time to time to reflect changes in our use of cookies or applicable legal requirements. When we make material changes, we will update the "Last Modified" date at the top of this page. We encourage you to review this Cookie Policy periodically. 11. Contact Us If you have any questions about this Cookie Policy or our use of cookies, please contact us at: Sequor Law 1111 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1250 Miami, Florida 33131 United States Phone: (+1) 305-372-8282 Fax: (+1) 305-372-8202 Email: info@sequorlaw.com Cookie Policy Latest Update: April 10, 2026

In-house forensic accounting team with experience in major corruption and insolvency matters. Investigating transactions, building damages models, and enforcement Complementary Resources Forensic Accounting In-House Forensic Accounting Built for Asset Tracing, Damages Modeling, and Enforcement With experience in some of the world’s largest corruption, insolvency, and embezzlement matters, Sequor Law’s forensic accounting team can be deployed to trace assets, investigate financial transactions, build damages models, and support court filings. In-house forensic support provides the firm with a distinct strategic advantage in enforcement proceedings. That in-house capability allows Sequor Law to develop and refine informed legal strategies at the same time it obtains and analyzes financial records, increasing the likelihood of success in enforcement matters. The firm also maintains tested relationships with many of the world’s leading forensic accounting providers to supplement internal capabilities when necessary. Financial Precision and Legal Strategy Unified Under One Roof Key contacts Key Contacts Forensic Accounting Bob Lindquist Director of Forensics blindquist@sequorlaw.com (+1) 305-372-8282 Open

Sequor Law's Arnoldo Lacayo and Nyana A. Miller named Rising Legal Stars by Latinvex for their expertise in international asset recovery, financial fraud, and cross-border insolvency. Two Sequor Law Attorneys Named Rising Legal Stars by Latinvex Open Awards & Recognition Open September 21, 2018 2 minutes read Sequor Law ARNOLDO LACAYO, Partner, Sequor Law Arnie Lacayo , a partner at Sequor Law, focuses his international litigation practice on financial fraud and asset recovery. He has extensive experience litigating complex disputes in state and federal courts and has represented multi-national corporations, sovereign governments, receivers, trustees and other foreign officeholders in matters pending in U.S. Courts. Key work includes representing the judicial administrator appointed in a Brazilian bankruptcy case in one of the largest failed bank bankruptcies in Brazil’s history; acting as lead U.S. counsel for the Liquidator and has successfully pursued recognition of the Chilean insolvency proceedings and of the Liquidator as foreign representative under Chapter 15 and Brazilian Liquidator in an adversary proceeding clawback action within a Chapter 15. Lacayo has also worked at length with the versatile 28 U.S.C. § 1782 discovery statute, including in one of the leading cases out of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Lacayo holds a J.D. from the University of Miami School of Law (2003) and a B.A. from the University of Notre Dame (2000). NYANA A. MILLER, Associate, Sequor Law Nyana Abreu Miller , an attorney at Sequor Law, focuses her practice on international asset recovery and financial fraud. Miller has worked on cases brought under Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code on behalf of foreign office holders of bankrupt Latin American companies and financial institutions where insiders misappropriated hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of assets into or through the United States. She represents individuals, corporations, receivers and trustees in litigation to recover assets that were concealed, fraudulently transferred, or otherwise misappropriated. Prior to joining Sequor Law, she worked on commercial, financial and real estate transactions at an international law firm. In that position, Miller represented bank syndicates in financial transactions for various purposes, including working capital, international trade and acquisitions. She holds a J.D., University of Miami School of Law (2011) and a B.A., University of Kansas (2005). Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Arnoldo B. Lacayo discusses international financial fraud, cross-border asset recovery, and crypto-related fraud in his WWL Thought Leader Global Elite Q&A. WWL Thought Leader Global Elite - Arnoldo B. Lacayo Q&A Open Awards & Recognition Open August 25, 2022 2 minutes read Sequor Law Navigating the evolving landscape of international financial fraud and asset recovery demands not only legal expertise, but a deep understanding of how fraudsters think and where they hide assets. In his ThoughtLeaders interview, Sequor Law Shareholder Arnoldo B. Lacayo offers a candid, experience-driven look at the challenges and strategic considerations that shape modern cross-border asset recovery work. Lacayo, whose practice focuses on financial fraud , asset recovery and cross-border insolvency , frames asset recovery as a discipline defined by its complexity and the ingenuity of adversaries. He explains that one of the greatest hurdles in this space is the boundless creativity of fraudsters and the sophisticated networks — including legal allies and financial professionals — they can deploy to shield assets and frustrate efforts by victims and creditors. A significant portion of the discussion centers on the global dimension of these disputes, particularly the flow of capital from regions like South America into the United States. Lacayo notes that political and economic pressures abroad often push disputed assets into U.S. jurisdictions , creating frequent and complex cross-border issues for litigants and counsel alike. The article also addresses how Sequor Law stays ahead of emerging trends, including crypto-related fraud . Lacayo emphasizes that the firm’s investigative and discovery strategies are constantly evolving as new technologies mature, even as crypto fraud continues to pose unique challenges. Lacayo reflects on some of the most intricate matters he has handled, from the Stanford International Bank Ponzi case to the largest bank failure in Brazilian history — each illustrating the multifaceted nature of asset concealment and recovery . His insights reinforce the importance of flexibility, innovation, and thorough preparation in formulating legal strategies across jurisdictions . Looking ahead, Lacayo stresses that staying “one step ahead” of those who conceal assets will require both legal innovation and judicial receptivity to new methods of discovery and relief. He also offers practical advice to aspiring asset recovery lawyers, underscoring the value of specialization, professional networking, and continual professional development in this demanding area of practice. For a deeper dive into Lacayo’s perspectives and professional experiences, we invite you to read the full interview in the PDF below. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

A Florida federal judge remands Turkish businessmen's attempt to block a $388M arbitral award back to state court, finding their removal to federal court was untimely. Turkish Brothers’ $388M Award Fight Sent Back To State Court Open In the News Open February 11, 2020 3 minutes read Sequor Law By Kelly Zegers Law360 (February 11, 2020, 7:37 PM EST) — A Florida federal judge has let a Turkish company go back to state court as it seeks to enforce a $338 million arbitral award, finding that two Turkish businessmen’s removal to federal court last year was untimely. U.S. District Judge Rodney Smith said brothers Mustafa and Sefa Çevik’s time-barred removal of the case was an attempt to seek a different ruling after a Florida state court confirmed the arbitral award that stemmed from a soured chromium ore mining license deal with the company, Turchrome Krom Madencili Sanay Ve Dis Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi Turkey. In determining the Çevik brothers’ removal was untimely and granting the company’s motion to remand, the judge applied a previous court’s ruling on an international arbitral awards convention that found a party couldn’t willingly proceed with discovery and trial in state court only to remove “when the first bite of what appears to be a ripe apple turns extremely sour.” In this case, the brothers were trying to take a “second bite at the apple,” Judge Smith said. “It could not be clearer from defendants’ motions filed in the instant case that this is exactly what defendants are trying to do; after receiving an adverse ruling from the state court when the state court confirmed the arbitral award, defendants are now trying to obtain a different ruling in this court — first through removal and then through their motions to dismiss,” the judge said. The award in question had been issued to Turchrome in arbitration against Mustafa Çevik, which Turchrome initiated after yields at chromium ore sites failed to meet expectations. The arbitration took place in Paris under the auspices of the International Chamber of Commerce. The suit, which accuses Mustafa Çevik of fraudulently transferring certain real estate to Sefa in an effort to avoid paying the award, claims the two brothers have numerous assets in South Florida that could be used to enforce the award, including real estate, at least one business, and a Mercedes and a Range Rover. The federal judge’s ruling was in step with Turchrome’s contention that the Turkish businessmen failed to remove the case because the convention’s phrase “before the trial thereof” meant that trial begins when both sides present an argument on an issue of law or fact, according to court documents. The brothers called that interpretation “aggressive,” arguing that removal is timely as long as it happens before the state court has adjudicated on the merits of all of a plaintiff’s claims or dismissed the entire suit, the judge said. The judge acknowledged the businessmen’s reading of the existing case law on “before the trial” wasn’t unreasonable because there’s not a lot of case law on it. The Florida state court confirmed the arbitral award in May last year, according to court records. The brothers had moved to dismiss Turchrome’s motion to confirm the award. “The unfavorable ruling was not on just any claim; it was on the l[i]nchpin claim because the fraudulent transfer claims are dependent on confirmation of the arbitral award,” the judge said. Because of his finding on the timeliness issue, the federal judge said the court wouldn’t address Turchrome’s waiver argument. Turchrome had asserted the businessmen waived their rights to remove by litigating the case in state court before removal. The judge denied Turchrome’s motion for costs, according to the order. Representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday. Turchrome Krom Madencili Sanay Ve Dis Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi Turkey is represented in state court by Leyza B. Florin , Bruno de Camargo and Edward H. Davis Jr . of Sequor Law PA and Matthew D. McGill of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP. Mustafa Çevik, Sefa Çevik and Charisma Marble LLC are represented by Aliette D. Rodz and Kristin Drecktrah Paz of Shutts & Bowen LLP. The case was Turchrome Krom Madencili Sanay Ve Dis Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi Turkey v. Cevik et al., case number 1:19-cv-22910, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. To view the original article, click here. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Global Restructuring Review profiles Sequor Law as a GRR 100 firm, highlighting its roots as a rebrand of Astigarraga Davis’s cross-border insolvency and asset recovery team led by Edward H. Davis, Jr. and Gregory Grossman, and its work for the Chilean liquidator of Onix Capital. Global Restructuring Review Top 100 Law Firms Listing Open Awards & Recognition Open July 31, 2017 2 minutes read Sequor Law Miami’s newly rebranded Sequor Law is the Chilean liquidator of bankrupt investment vehicle Onix Capital Global head of restructuring and insolvency Gregory Grossman History of the practice Shareholders Edward Davis and Gregory Grossman launched boutique Sequor Law in April, in what was effectively a rebrand of Miami firm Astigarraga Davis’ cross-border insolvency, international asset recovery and financial fraud team. Davis and Grossman, two of the founders of Astigarraga Davis, decided to establish the new outfit when their former firm’s international arbitration practice left to join global law firm Reed Smith. All of the attorneys from Astigarraga Davis’ cross-border insolvency, international asset recovery, and financial fraud practice were retained by Sequor Law. Network Grossman heads up the firm’s international insolvency and financial litigation practice, which operates out of a solitary office in Miami. Who uses it? The team represents international banks, sovereign governments and government institutions, liquidators and receivers, lenders and multinational corporations, as well as individuals. Some notable clients include Big Four professional services firm PricewaterhouseCoopers and the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. Historic track record The practice, under Astigarraga Davis and Sequor Law, has made over 20 Chapter 15 filings in the US to recognise insolvency proceedings in diverse jurisdictions including Antigua, Austria, Barbados, Brazil, the BVI, the Cayman Islands, Chile, Mexico, Romania and the UK. Indeed, Grossman says the firm has filed more Chapter 15s than any other law firm in the US. Notably, Davis and Grossman filed the first Chapter 15 bankruptcy petition in the state of Florida, on behalf of PricewaterhouseCoopers as the custodian of failed financial institution Bancafe International Barbados. Davis also served as lead civil counsel for the government of Antigua and Barbuda in relation to an alleged fraud in the payment of debt owed to a Japanese leader that sponsored the building of the Crabbs Desalination and Power Plant in northeast Antigua. Elsewhere, the team was instructed to represent the joint liquidators of Stanford International Bank in efforts to recover assets relating to a US $7 billion Ponzi scheme- the second largest Ponzi scheme in world history, which has seen filings in Antigua, the UK, the US and Canada. Recent events During our research period, Sequor Law was instructed as counsel to the court-appointed liquidator and foreign representative of bankrupt Chilean investment firm Onix Capital in Chapter 15 proceedings in Florida. The liquidator is seeking to recover assets in excess of $100 million* relating to an alleged Ponzi scheme operated by the group’s CEO, Chilean businessman Alberto Chang-Rajii. The Sequor team also continues to act as primary US counsel to the joint liquidators of Stanford International Bank. The complete GRR 100 guide will be accessible at Global Restructuring Review website * The GRR 100 incorrectly values the Onix case as a $7.4 million dollar Ponzi scheme. The correct value of the Ponzi scheme is in excess of $100 million. Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

1. Introduction Sequor Law ("Sequor Law," "we," "us," or "our") is committed to protecting your privacy and the security of your personal information. This Privacy Policy explains how we collect, use, disclose, retain, and safeguard information when you visit our website located at https://www.sequorlaw.com (the "Website"), subscribe to our newsletter, or otherwise interact with us online. This Privacy Policy applies to information collected through our Website and does not apply to information collected offline or through any other means, except as expressly stated herein. By accessing or using our Website, you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and agree to be bound by this Privacy Policy. If you do not agree with the practices described in this Privacy Policy, please do not use our Website. Sequor Law is a law firm with its principal office located at 1111 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1250, Miami, Florida 33131, United States. 2. Information We Collect 2.1 Information You Provide Voluntarily We may collect personal information that you voluntarily provide to us when you interact with our Website. This may include: Newsletter Subscriptions: When you subscribe to our newsletter, we collect your name and email address. Our newsletters are distributed through HubSpot, a third-party email marketing platform. When you subscribe, your information is stored and processed in HubSpot’s systems in addition to our own. HubSpot may collect additional technical data in connection with the delivery of our newsletters, including email open rates, click-through data, IP addresses, browser type, and device information through the use of tracking pixels and similar technologies embedded in our emails. Email Communications: If you contact us via email, we collect your email address, name, and any information you include in your correspondence. 2.2 Information Collected Automatically When you visit our Website, certain information is collected automatically through cookies and similar tracking technologies. This includes: Device and Browser Information: IP address, browser type and version, operating system, device type, and screen resolution. Usage Data: Pages visited, time spent on pages, referring URLs, click patterns, and navigation paths. Google Analytics (GA4) Data: We use Google Analytics 4 ("GA4") to analyze visitor behavior and improve our Website. GA4 collects data through first-party cookies (see our Cookie Policy for specific cookie details). GA4 does not store your full IP address. Data collected includes session information, engagement metrics, traffic sources, and anonymized demographic data. 2.3 Information We Do Not Collect We do not operate a contact form on our Website. We do not knowingly collect sensitive personal information such as financial account numbers, Social Security numbers, health information, or biometric data through our Website. 3. How We Use Your Information We use the information we collect for the following purposes: To send periodic newsletters containing firm news, legal updates, industry insights, and related information to subscribers who have opted in to receive such communications. To analyze Website traffic and visitor behavior in order to improve the functionality, content, and user experience of our Website. To monitor and maintain the security and integrity of our Website. To respond to inquiries and communications you send to us. To comply with applicable legal obligations, enforce our Terms and Conditions, and protect our rights, privacy, safety, or property, or that of our clients or others. 4. Legal Bases for Processing (For EEA, UK, and Swiss Visitors) If you are located in the European Economic Area ("EEA"), the United Kingdom ("UK"), or Switzerland, we process your personal data only when we have a valid legal basis to do so. The legal bases we rely upon include: Consent: Where you have given us clear, affirmative consent to process your personal data for specific purposes, such as subscribing to our newsletter or accepting analytics cookies. You may withdraw your consent at any time without affecting the lawfulness of processing carried out prior to withdrawal. Legitimate Interests: Where processing is necessary for our legitimate business interests, such as analyzing Website usage to improve our services, provided that such interests are not overridden by your data protection rights. Our legitimate interests include operating and improving our Website, understanding how visitors interact with our content, and ensuring the security of our online presence. Legal Obligation: Where processing is necessary for us to comply with a legal obligation to which we are subject. 5. Cookies and Tracking Technologies Our Website uses cookies and similar tracking technologies to collect and store certain information about your visit. We use cookies primarily for website analytics purposes through Google Analytics 4 (GA4). When you first visit our Website, you will be presented with a cookie consent banner that allows you to accept, decline, or manage your cookie preferences. Analytics cookies will not be placed on your device unless you have provided your consent. For detailed information about the specific cookies we use, their purposes, and durations, please refer to our separate Cookie Policy, which is available on our Website and should be read in conjunction with this Privacy Policy. 6. Disclosure of Your Information We do not sell, trade, rent, or otherwise transfer your personally identifiable information to outside parties for their own marketing purposes. We may share your information in the following circumstances: Service Providers: We share information with trusted third-party service providers who assist us in operating our Website, conducting our business, and servicing you. These include HubSpot (email marketing and newsletter distribution) and Google (website analytics via GA4). These service providers are contractually obligated to keep your information confidential and to use it only for the purposes for which we disclose it to them. Legal Requirements: We may disclose your information when we believe in good faith that disclosure is necessary to comply with applicable law, regulation, legal process, or governmental request; to enforce our Terms and Conditions or other agreements; or to protect our rights, property, or safety, or the rights, property, or safety of our clients or others. Aggregate or De-identified Data: We may share aggregated or de-identified information that cannot reasonably be used to identify you with third parties for marketing, analytics, or other purposes. 7. Data Retention We retain personal information for as long as necessary to fulfill the purposes for which it was collected, unless a longer retention period is required or permitted by law. Newsletter Subscribers: We retain the personal information of newsletter subscribers (name and email address) for as long as the subscription remains active. If you unsubscribe, we will delete your personal information within ninety (90) days of your unsubscribe request, unless we are required to retain it for legal or regulatory purposes. We periodically review our subscriber list and may remove contacts who have had no engagement (e.g., no email opens or clicks) for an extended period, in accordance with data minimization principles and applicable email deliverability best practices. The criteria used to determine the applicable review period include the length of inactivity, the nature of the subscriber’s prior engagement with the firm, and evolving regulatory and technical requirements. Website Analytics Data: Analytics data collected through Google Analytics 4 is retained in accordance with our GA4 configuration settings. GA4 data retention is set to fourteen (14) months, after which user-level and event-level data associated with cookies is automatically deleted. Aggregated reports that do not contain personally identifiable information may be retained indefinitely. Email Correspondence: If you correspond with us via email, we retain your communications for as long as necessary to address the matter at hand and for a reasonable period thereafter for record-keeping purposes. 8. Your Rights and Choices 8.1 All Users Regardless of your location, you have the following choices with respect to your personal information: Newsletter Opt-Out: You may unsubscribe from our newsletter at any time by clicking the "unsubscribe" link included at the bottom of each newsletter email, or by contacting us at the address provided below. Cookie Preferences: You may manage your cookie preferences through the cookie consent banner on our Website or by adjusting your browser settings. Please note that disabling certain cookies may affect the functionality of our Website. 8.2 Rights for EEA, UK, and Swiss Residents If you are located in the European Economic Area, the United Kingdom, or Switzerland, you have additional rights under the General Data Protection Regulation ("GDPR") and equivalent local laws, including: Right of Access: You have the right to request confirmation as to whether we process your personal data and, if so, to request a copy of that personal data. Right to Rectification: You have the right to request that we correct any inaccurate personal data or complete any incomplete personal data concerning you. Right to Erasure: You have the right to request that we delete your personal data, subject to certain legal exceptions. Right to Restriction of Processing: You have the right to request that we restrict the processing of your personal data in certain circumstances. Right to Data Portability: You have the right to receive your personal data in a structured, commonly used, and machine-readable format and to transmit that data to another controller. Right to Object: You have the right to object to the processing of your personal data where we rely on legitimate interests as our legal basis. Right to Withdraw Consent: Where we rely on consent as the legal basis for processing, you have the right to withdraw your consent at any time. Right to Lodge a Complaint: You have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority in the EU or UK member state of your habitual residence, place of work, or place of the alleged infringement. To exercise any of these rights, please contact us using the information provided in the "Contact Us" section below. We will respond to your request within one (1) month, as required by applicable law. In certain circumstances, we may extend this period by an additional two (2) months, in which case we will inform you of the extension and the reasons for the delay. 8.3 Rights for California Residents If you are a California resident, you may have additional rights under the California Consumer Privacy Act, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act ("CCPA/CPRA"). Please note that the CCPA/CPRA applies to businesses that meet certain revenue and data processing thresholds. While Sequor Law may not meet all applicable thresholds, we provide the following information as a matter of transparency and good practice: Right to Know: You have the right to request that we disclose the categories and specific pieces of personal information we have collected about you, the categories of sources from which the information is collected, the business or commercial purpose for collecting the information, and the categories of third parties with whom we share the information. Right to Delete: You have the right to request deletion of personal information we have collected from you, subject to certain legal exceptions. Right to Correct: You have the right to request correction of inaccurate personal information. Right to Opt-Out of Sale or Sharing: We do not sell your personal information, nor do we share it for cross-context behavioral advertising purposes. Right to Non-Discrimination: We will not discriminate against you for exercising any of your rights under the CCPA/CPRA. 8.4 Rights Under Other U.S. State Privacy Laws Residents of other U.S. states with comprehensive consumer privacy laws (including but not limited to Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, Utah, Oregon, Texas, Montana, and others) may have similar rights to access, correct, delete, and opt out of certain processing of their personal information. If you are a resident of a state with an applicable consumer privacy law, please contact us to exercise your rights. 9. Third-Party Service Providers We engage the following third-party service providers in connection with our Website and communications: 9.1 Google Analytics 4 (GA4) We use Google Analytics 4, a web analytics service provided by Google LLC ("Google"), to analyze visitor behavior on our Website. GA4 uses first-party cookies to distinguish unique users and sessions. GA4 does not store full IP addresses. Data collected by GA4 is processed in accordance with Google’s Privacy Policy (https://policies.google.com/privacy). We have configured GA4 to retain user-level and event-level data for fourteen (14) months. Google may transfer data to servers located outside the EEA; Google relies on Standard Contractual Clauses and other approved transfer mechanisms for such transfers. 9.2 HubSpot We use HubSpot, Inc. ("HubSpot") as our email marketing platform for distributing newsletters. Newsletters are sent from an email address using the sequorlaw.com domain, but the distribution infrastructure is provided by HubSpot. When you receive a newsletter from us, HubSpot may collect the following data through tracking pixels and links embedded in the email: whether you opened the email, which links you clicked, your IP address at the time of opening, and your email client and device information. This data is used to measure the effectiveness of our communications and to improve our content. HubSpot’s privacy practices are governed by its own Privacy Policy (https://legal.hubspot.com/privacy-policy). HubSpot maintains a Data Processing Agreement and a list of its sub-processors, both available on its legal page (https://legal.hubspot.com ). HubSpot stores data on servers in the United States and relies on Standard Contractual Clauses for international data transfers. 10. Data Security We implement reasonable administrative, technical, and physical security measures designed to protect the personal information we collect against unauthorized access, alteration, disclosure, or destruction. These measures include, but are not limited to, encryption of data in transit (SSL/TLS), access controls, and regular security assessments. However, no method of transmission over the Internet or method of electronic storage is completely secure, and we cannot guarantee absolute security. If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, please notify us immediately using the contact information provided below. 11. International Data Transfers Sequor Law is based in the United States. If you access our Website from outside the United States, please be aware that your information may be transferred to, stored in, and processed in the United States, where data protection laws may differ from those in your country of residence. Where we transfer personal data from the EEA, UK, or Switzerland to countries that have not been deemed to provide an adequate level of data protection, we rely on appropriate safeguards, including Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission, to ensure the protection of your personal data. By using our Website or providing us with your personal information, you acknowledge and consent to the transfer, storage, and processing of your information in the United States and other jurisdictions as described in this Privacy Policy. 12. Third-Party Links Our Website may contain links to third-party websites, applications, or services that are not owned or controlled by Sequor Law. This Privacy Policy does not apply to third-party websites or services. We encourage you to review the privacy policies of any third-party websites you visit. Sequor Law is not responsible for the privacy practices or content of third-party websites. 13. Children’s Privacy Our Website is not directed to individuals under the age of sixteen (16), and we do not knowingly collect personal information from children under sixteen (16). If we become aware that we have inadvertently collected personal information from a child under sixteen (16), we will take steps to delete such information as soon as practicable. If you believe that we may have collected information from a child under sixteen (16), please contact us using the information provided below. 14. Do Not Track Signals Some web browsers may transmit "Do Not Track" (DNT) signals to websites. Because there is no universally accepted standard for how to respond to DNT signals, our Website does not currently respond to DNT signals. However, you can manage your cookie preferences through the cookie consent banner on our Website. 15. Changes to This Privacy Policy We may update this Privacy Policy from time to time to reflect changes in our practices, technologies, legal requirements, or other factors. When we make material changes to this Privacy Policy, we will update the "Last Modified" date at the top of this page and, where appropriate, provide additional notice (such as a notice on our Website). We encourage you to review this Privacy Policy periodically to stay informed about how we are protecting your information. Your continued use of our Website after the posting of changes constitutes your acceptance of such changes. 16. Contact Us If you have any questions, concerns, or requests regarding this Privacy Policy, our data practices, or if you wish to exercise any of your rights described herein, please contact us at: Sequor Law 1111 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1250 Miami, Florida 33131 United States Phone: (+1) 305-372-8282 Fax: (+1) 305-372-8202 Email: info@sequorlaw.com For privacy-specific inquiries, we endeavor to respond to all requests within thirty (30) days. For requests made under the GDPR, we will respond within one (1) month as required by applicable law. Privacy Policy Latest Update: April 10, 2026

An Australian court recognised CP Legal partner Carlos Parada Abate as liquidator and foreign representative of Alberto Chang Rajii under Australia’s Cross-Border Insolvency Act, building on earlier recognition decisions in Florida, the UK and Isle of Man and Chapter 15 recognition of the Onix proceedings. Chilean liquidator in alleged Ponzi case recognised in Australia Open In the News Open February 13, 2018 3 minutes read Sequor Law By Douglas Thomson An Australian court has become the latest to recognise Chilean liquidation proceedings in what is alleged to be the South American state’s first major Ponzi scheme dismantling, following courts in the US, UK and Isle of Man. JusticeJacqueline Gleeson at the Federal Court of Australia’s New South Wales registry in Sydney recognised CP Legal partner Carlos Parada Abate as liquidator and foreign representative of the estate of Chilean businessman Alberto Chang Rajii, under Australia’s Cross-Border Insolvency Act in a ruling on 29 January. She also recognised proceedings to liquidate Chang’s assets before the 15 th Civil Court of Santiago as a foreign main proceeding under the Australia’s embodiment of the UNCITRAL Model Law. The court followed up with a notice to creditors on 2 February. The recognitions follow a trio of similar decisions by courts in Florida, London and the Isle of Man over the course of September. The US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida has also granted Chapter 15 recognition of separate Chilean proceedings liquidating Chang’s investment vehicle Onix, a company he co-founded with his mother in 2009. Chang is accused of using Onix to defraud investors through a set of promissory notes guaranteed by what was in fact another Chang company, Grupo Arcano. The US Securities and Exchange Committee has accused him of manufacturing an identity as an award-winning angel investor, holding himself out as an early Google financier with an MBA from Stanford University, who falsely told investors their money would be put into Silicon Valley companies like Uber and Snapchat. Liquidator Parada has said in court filings that in fact Chang only invested a small part of the funds, using them to fund a lavish lifestyle for himself instead. Onix went into compulsory liquidation in May 2016 after it defaulted on its liabilities to a Chilean creditor, with the Santiago court appointing Parada as its liquidator. The company had over US$120 million in liabilities to over 1,000 creditors at the time of its liquidation. A year later, Chiang’s own estate was placed in compulsory liquidation by the 15 th Civil Court of Santiago and Parada was appointed to oversee this case too. Chang is now facing charges in Chile of fraud, money laundering and operating without a valid licence. He left Chile for Malta the month before Onix’s liquidation and although he was arrested there in December 2016, the Maltese courts have refused Chile’s request for his extradition. Chile has appealed that ruling. In a service ruling in December, the Australian court described Chang’s current whereabouts as unknown, though he did then appear at a hearing relating to his extradition from Malta on 24 January. The court said he would be served through his personal email address and his Chilean legal counsel. Parada was represented in the Australian proceedings by Sydney firm Arnold Bloch Leibler, and the hearings were attended by Sequor Law partner Edward Davis from Miami, his US counsel. Davis says, “We are very happy to have obtained, along with local counsel, additional recognition for Mr Parada in Australia which will allow him to secure real estate, bank accounts and artwork that are believed to be worth more than AU$5 million [US$4 million] in value.” Chang’s alleged personal spending on properties in Australia, the British Virgin Islands, Miami and London has instigated the global round of recognition proceedings for his Chilean liquidation. Chang’s property on the territory’s Moskito Island was partially destroyed last year by Hurricane Irma. The asset is nevertheless among those in the territory being pursued by a companion BVI liquidation with Grant Thornton as liquidator and Parada as its largest creditor, as the BVI does not permit the recognition of foreign liquidators. In the Federal Court of Australia Bench Justice Jacqueline Gleeson Counsel to Carlos Parada Abate (liquidator and foreign representative) Arnold Bloch Leibler In the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Chancery Division Counsel to Carlos Abate Parada (liquidator and foreign respresentative) PCB Litigation Partner Jon Felce in London In the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida In re: Alberto Samuel Chang Rajii Judge Laurel Isicoff Counsel to Carlos Abate Parada (liquidator and foreign representative) Sequor Law Founding shareholders Gregory Grossman and Edward Davis with partner Arnoldo Lacayo in Miami In the Isle of Man Counsel to Carlos Abate Parada (liquidator and foreign representative) Callin Wild Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.

Sequor Law's Greg Grossman and Francis Curiel analyze the Eleventh Circuit's broad discovery ruling under Section 1782 in support of foreign bankruptcy proceedings, comparing it to Chapter 15. Eleventh Circuit Gives Green Light to Broad Discovery in Aid of Foreign Bankruptcies Open Legal Insights Open October 21, 2020 5 minutes read Sequor Law By Greg Grossman and Francis Curiel , Miami The Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s broad grant of discovery for use in five foreign bankruptcy proceedings to which the discovery applicant was a creditor-party. This article will briefly examine how the (relaxed) standard set forth by this Section 1782 proceeding compares to the (less relaxed) standard set forth by two notable Chapter 15 cases. In re Petroforte, by now a well-known Chapter 15 case, involved the liquidation of one of Brazil’s largest gas and ethanol distributors. During the liquidation, the Brazilian trustee found evidence of fraudulent transfers made to several entities, which led the Brazilian court to extend the bankruptcy case to include the transferees. The Brazilian trustee commenced a Chapter 15 proceeding in the Southern District of Florida to seek discovery to assist the Brazilian liquidation. The discovery targets objected, arguing that the subpoenas sought broad financial information about the non-debtor targets that exceeded the limits of discovery under Section 1521(a)(4) and Rule 2004. When the court interpreted the scope of “debtor” under Section 1521(a)(4), it held, in part, that the entities that were subject to the Brazilian bankruptcy extension order were “debtors subject to Section 1521’s discovery powers; however, with regard to any third parties who were not subject to the extension order, the trustee was entitled to broad discovery only when the debtor was a majority stockholder in the non-debtor discovery target. In re SAM likewise dealt with a Chapter 15 proceeding stemming from a Brazilian bankruptcy, wherein the debtor concealed corporate interests by transferring property to family members. The foreign representative sought documents relating to non-debtors who the foreign representative alleged were relevant to his investigation and potential recovery of assets of the foreign estate. The court focused on whether the foreign representative exceeded the proper scope of Rule 2004 discovery. It found that the foreign representative was entitled to discovery relating to (1) the transferees and (2) the non-debtor corporate entities in which the debtor had a majority interest or in those entities already found by the Brazilian courts to have participated in the debtor’s asset concealment scheme. The foreign representative was not entitled to discovery relating to the non-debtor entities whose connections to the debtor had not yet been established in the Brazilian courts. The court further noted that the foreign representative’s inquiries of non-debtors were to be narrowly tailored. Notably, courts have analogized discovery under Chapter 15 with discovery under 28 U.S.C. § 1782. An incongruity may now exist when comparing Petroforte and In re SAM to the Eleventh Circuit’s recent case, In re Victoria. In March 2018, Victoria, LLC (Victoria) filed a § 1782 application in the Southern District of Florida, seeking discovery for use in five pending Russian bankruptcy proceedings to which Victoria was a creditor. The bankruptcy proceedings pertained to either (1) Iliya Likhtenfeld (the Debtor) or (2) his Russian companies. Victoria planned to object to the dischargeability of debt, but first needed proof that the Debtor failed to disclose his U.S. assets in the Russian bankruptcies. To do so, Victoria requested testimony and documents relating to corporate governance, banking, financing, money transfers, business transactions, accounting practices, and the like, from (1) the Debtor; (2) Florida banks with which the Debtor did business; (3) Florida entities that the Debtor allegedly owned or was affiliated with; and (4) individuals affiliated with the Florida entities. To support the existence of these affiliations, Victoria submitted Sunbiz corporate records. Some of these records showed that a woman—who lived at the same address as the Debtor—acted as (either current or former) manager and registered agent of two of the target Florida entities. Notably, the Debtor’s name appeared nowhere on the corporate records of these two Florida entities. Discovery was nonetheless granted for use in the Russian bankruptcies. The shared residence between the Debtor and the manager of these entities proved connection enough. Moreover, in support of its allegations that the subpoena targets were “closely related” to the Debtor, and that the targets “should have documents and knowledge of assets tied to the Russian [bankruptcies],” Victoria created and submitted a chart showing that many of the Florida entities shared the same address, principals, and registered agents. The entities were thus alleged to be interrelated to each other, although not all directly related to the Debtor himself. Victoria also submitted two noteworthy declarations in support of its Section 1782 application. The first declarant alleged “upon information and belief” that the Debtor had (1) caused his Russian companies to enter loan agreements with no intention of repaying; (2) failed to repay the borrowed money; and (3) transferred the borrowed money directly or indirectly to his family members or trusted representatives. Ultimately, the declarant “believed” that the borrowed funds found their way into the United States and were used, in part, to support the Debtor’s luxurious lifestyle in Florida. Neither the declarant nor Victoria submitted any other evidence to support these allegations or the connection between the borrowed funds and the Florida corporations. The second declarant stated that the Debtor had not disclosed any of his U.S. assets to the Russian bankruptcy court even though, “based on the [Sunbiz corporate records],” the Debtor owned and/or held officer positions in several Florida entities. Despite the tenuous connections between the Debtor and some subpoena targets, the court granted the broad financial discovery request with few limitations. The aforementioned evidence (or lack thereof) was enough for this grant of discovery to survive through the Eleventh Circuit, which upheld the district court’s ruling. The disconnect between the above cases poses a noteworthy question—is the Petroforte limitation too narrow in light of the In re Victoria grant of discovery? Victoria, as a creditor seeking discovery assistance for use in foreign bankruptcy proceedings, was granted wide-ranging discovery relating to (1) the Debtor; (2) the Debtor’s banks; (3) non-debtor associates; and (4) non-debtor entities, some of which showed little to no relation to the Debtor besides a shared address with the entities’ manager. The court did not inquire into the Debtor’s ownership interests (or transfer thereof). Nor did it probe into the foreign courts’ findings. Rather, the grant of discovery was based largely on uncorroborated beliefs and bare allegations. More so, it was based on reasonable suspicion that these target individuals and non-debtor entities were involved in the Debtor’s transfer of assets to the detriment of his creditors. In re Victoria has introduced a more relaxed standard that loosens the restrictions placed on discovery requests for use in foreign bankruptcies. In light of this recent development, perhaps it is time to reassess the scope of discovery in Chapter 15 cases, too. Click here to read the original PDF . Open Back to all Entries Share this article Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Latest News & Insights Open Open Attorney Spotlight May 19, 2026 1 minute read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Noah Rosenblum 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was drawn to law because I've always enjoyed solving complicated problems and thinking.. Attorney Spotlight May 9, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Michael Hanlon 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was less drawn to law in the abstract and more.. Firm News Apr 11, 2026 2 minutes read Sequor Law Celebrates National Pet Day with Continued Support of Paws4You Rescue In recognition of National Pet Day, Sequor Law is proud to continue its support of Paws4You Rescue, a Miami-based nonprofit... Attorney Spotlight Jan 29, 2026 2 minutes read Attorney Spotlight – Get to Know Alain M. Acanda 1. What inspired you to pursue a law career? I was inspired to pursue a career in the law after having negative experiences with the law as.