Craig Martin serves as co-chair of Morrison Foerster’s Investigations + White Collar Defense and Sustainability + Corporate Responsibility practice groups.

Craig has led dozens of internal investigations, often on behalf of audit and special committees. Though Craig most frequently assists with matters involving complex financial accounting and reporting issues, his investigations have covered a broad range of subjects, including corporate disclosures, commercial practices, scientific misconduct, commercial and foreign bribery, and misuse of company assets, among many others.

In addition, Craig represents issuers involved in U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) enforcement and U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) investigations. Craig’s clients span various industries, including technology, healthcare and life sciences, financial services, manufacturing, real estate, and agriculture. Craig has obtained excellent results for clients, often in the wake of a serious financial accounting misstatements or disclosure failures.

Craig also serves as personal counsel to executives and directors in government and internal investigations. Attuned to the scrutiny that corporate executives can face in the wake of a business setback, Craig has helped CEOs, CFOs, and general counsel successfully navigate parallel SEC, DOJ, and internal investigations.

Clients have consistently praised Craig for his sound judgment, investigative experience, pragmatism, and credibility. Craig is regularly recognized by leading industry publications such as Legal 500 US in its Corporate Investigations and White Collar Defense category and Chambers USA’s (California) Litigation: White Collar Crime & Government Investigations category. Clients describe Craig as “experienced, poised and patient,” “extremely sophisticated and able to distill key elements down to the basics and clearly explain legal concepts in a business and layman-friendly fashion,” and “extremely smart and focused.” He is recognized as “a superstar in the Bay Area for internal investigations” and is known for “being a straightshooter” with “a great team to support investigations.” Craig has also been named to Securities Docket’s “Enforcement Elite,” which recognizes the best securities enforcement defense lawyers in the business.

In addition to representing clients, Craig served for a decade as a Firmwide Managing Partner at Morrison Foerster (2012-2022).

Craig was an enforcement attorney in the SEC’s San Francisco office from 1999 to 2002. During his tenure at the SEC, he worked closely with attorneys and investigators from DOJ on both financial accounting fraud and insider trading matters. Of particular note, Craig led one of the largest insider trading cases in SEC history, in which 15 individuals were charged with illegal trading.

Craig is a leading commentator on internal investigation procedures, securities litigation and enforcement, corporate governance, and compliance, and has been quoted in publications such as the Daily Journal, The Recorder, and GC Magazine. He has also been invited to speak on those topics by prominent industry organizations including the Securities Enforcement Forum, the Practising Law Institute, the Institute for Corporate Counsel, the Institute of Internal Auditors, the National Society of Compliance Professionals, and the Association of Corporate Counsel, among others.

Craig earned his B.A. from the University of California, Berkeley. He received his J.D. from Stanford Law School, where he was an associate editor of The Stanford Law Review.

Representative Experience

• Engaged by corporate boards and management of major clients to lead investigations concerning allegations of accounting, disclosure, and commercial misconduct, including:
• Software company, investigating allegations of non-GAAP financial reporting misstatements.
• Infrastructure construction company, investigating allegations of accounting fraud.
• Software company, investigating alleged violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
• Pharmaceutical company, investigating allegations of scientific misconduct.
• Data infrastructure company, investigating allegations of financial accounting fraud.
• Medical device company, investigating allegations of improper disclosures concerning defective products.
• Electronics manufacturer, investigating allegations that it misled customers and violated the financial terms of contracts.
• Transport network company, investigating allegations of financial accounting misconduct and whistleblower retaliation.
• Cloud-based communications company, investigating allegations of financial accounting fraud.
• Venture capital firm, investigating allegations that the performance of portfolio companies had been misrepresented.
• Healthcare technology company, investigating allegations of financial accounting fraud, false disclosures, and commercial bribery.
• Retailer, concerning allegations that finance executives had engaged in accounting misconduct.
• Software company, investigating allegations of financial accounting improprieties and misstated results.
• Network infrastructure company, investigating allegations of accounting fraud.
• Automobile parts manufacturer, investigating allegations of accounting fraud and diversion of company assets.
• Physical security company, investigating allegations of executive misuse of company funds.
• Medical device company, investigating allegations of improper sales practices.
• Computer networking company, investigating allegations of financial accounting fraud.
• Computer hardware, networking, semiconductor, and financial companies, investigating stock option granting practices.

• Represented issuers in SEC and DOJ investigations, including:

• Semiconductor company in SEC and DOJ investigations regarding allegations of financial accounting and disclosure misconduct. The DOJ closed its investigation without taking action against our client, and the SEC resolved the matter on favorable terms.

• Alternative energy company in an SEC investigation regarding the company’s accounting and reporting practices. The SEC took no action against our client.

• Enterprise software company in an SEC investigation regarding alleged revenue accounting improprieties and violations of the company’s code of ethics. The SEC took no action against our client.

• Enterprise software company in an SEC investigation following a multi-year restatement. The SEC resolved the case on favorable terms.

• Real estate company in an SEC investigation concerning allegations of misuse of company funds and workplace misconduct. The SEC took no action against our client.

• Alternative energy company in an SEC investigation following an accounting restatement. The SEC took no action against our client.

• Web services provider in SEC and DOJ investigations concerning disclosures following a cybersecurity incident. The DOJ closed its investigation without taking action against our client, and the SEC resolved the matter on favorable terms.

• Technology services provider in connection with an SEC investigation concerning a cybersecurity disclosure. The SEC took no action against our client.

• Retailer in an SEC investigation following an accounting restatement. The SEC took no action against our client.

• Cloud computing company in an SEC investigation concerning disclosures following a cybersecurity incident. The SEC took no action against our client.

• Biopesticide company in an SEC investigation concerning financial accounting improprieties and a restatement. The SEC resolved the case on favorable terms.

• Carrier in an investigation regarding alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and other anti-bribery statutes in China, elsewhere in Asia, and Latin America. The SEC and DOJ took no action against our client.

• Cybersecurity firm in an SEC investigation concerning disclosures regarding a cybersecurity incident. The SEC took no action against our client.

• Network infrastructure company in an SEC investigation regarding alleged accounting improprieties following a significant restatement. The SEC resolved the matter on favorable terms.

• Retailer in an SEC investigation into alleged accounting irregularities following the company’s restatement. The SEC resolved the case on favorable terms.

• Pharmaceutical distributor and its executives in connection with an SEC accounting investigation. The SEC took no action against our client.

• Represented executives in SEC, DOJ, and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) investigations, including:

• Chief Financial Officer in connection with SEC investigation concerning IPO projections. The SEC did not charge our client.

• Chief Financial Officer in connection with an SEC investigation following a technology company’s financial accounting restatement. The SEC did not charge our client.

• Chief Accounting Officer in connection with an SEC investigation after a technology manufacturing company’s restatement. The SEC did not charge our client.

• General Counsel and Acting CFO in connection with an SEC investigation following a software company’s restatement. The SEC did not charge our client.

• General Counsel in connection with a SEC and DOJ investigations following employee benefit administration company’s restatement, disclosures, and representations to auditors. Neither the DOJ nor the SEC charged our client.

• General Counsel in connection with an audit committee investigation concerning cybersecurity company’s accounting and disclosure practices. The SEC took no action against our client.

• Chief Executive Officer in connection with an SEC investigation into alleged misuse of company funds. The SEC resolved the matter on favorable terms.

• Multiple CEOs, CFOs, COOs, general counsel, and other executives in connection with various stock option investigations conducted by the SEC, DOJ, and boards of directors. No action was taken against our clients.

• Executives in numerous insider trading investigations conducted by the SEC, DOJ, and/or FINRA.

• Represented bank, investment advisor, and broker-dealer clients in SEC, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, FINRA, Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, DOJ, and private litigation matters relating to the credit crisis and mortgage‑backed securities.