Investigations & Complex Disputes
York began his legal career as a trial lawyer in the U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, Western Criminal Enforcement Section — conducting grand jury investigations, examining witnesses, and obtaining convictions on charges ranging from tax evasion and obstruction of justice to conspiracy to defraud the United States. Before thirty years of patent courtrooms, there was federal prosecution. The evidentiary instincts and investigative discipline built in that office have informed every matter that followed.
Defense counsel who has prosecuted understands how the government builds a case — what evidence it values, what arguments it finds persuasive, and where its approach is vulnerable. That perspective is not academic. It was earned across real investigations, real grand juries, and real trials. It informs how York assesses exposure, advises on voluntary disclosure decisions, structures internal investigations, and prepares clients for the proceedings that follow. The range of matters extends from tax evasion and financial fraud to FCPA enforcement, cartel investigations, and matters involving espionage against the United States.
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
Anti-bribery compliance · Government enforcement defense · Internal investigations · Japanese company exposure
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act imposes anti-bribery and accounting controls obligations on U.S. issuers and domestic concerns, and — through its broad jurisdictional reach — on foreign companies and individuals connected to U.S. markets or using U.S. instrumentalities. For Japanese companies with U.S. subsidiaries, U.S.-listed ADRs, or business relationships involving U.S. persons, FCPA exposure is a concrete and recurring risk, not a theoretical one.
YMF Law handles FCPA matters across the full enforcement cycle. Pre-enforcement: compliance program assessment, third-party due diligence, and the internal controls evaluation that determines whether a company's FCPA posture would survive government scrutiny. When a potential violation surfaces — through a whistleblower report, an internal audit finding, or government inquiry — the internal investigation must be conducted with the end point in mind: voluntary disclosure to the DOJ or SEC, or a defensible conclusion that disclosure is not warranted.
For Japanese companies, the FCPA's intersection with Japanese corporate culture and decision-making structures creates specific challenges: understanding where payments that are ordinary business practice in certain markets cross into FCPA liability, communicating with Japanese leadership about investigation scope and legal exposure in terms they can act on, and coordinating between U.S. enforcement counsel and Japanese legal departments that may have never navigated a U.S. government investigation. YMF Law provides that coordination — in Japanese, at the senior level, from a lawyer who has been on both sides of the process.
Grand Jury Investigations
Target, subject, and witness representation · Subpoena responses · Strategic advice
A grand jury investigation is the federal government's primary investigative tool before criminal charges are brought — and the stage at which counsel's judgment matters most. The decisions made in response to a grand jury subpoena, in advising a witness about cooperation, and in assessing whether a client is a target, subject, or witness shape everything that follows. Those decisions are made under time pressure, with incomplete information about the government's theory, and with consequences that are difficult to reverse.
York's grand jury experience began as a prosecutor — conducting investigations, presenting evidence, and obtaining indictments — and continued in civil practice as companies and individuals on the receiving end of grand jury process sought counsel who understood how the proceedings actually develop from the government's side. That perspective informs the most important judgment in any grand jury representation: accurate assessment of where the client sits in the government's investigation, and what response — cooperation, assertion of privilege, or challenge to scope — best protects the client's interests.
For Japanese companies and their employees subpoenaed into U.S. grand jury proceedings, the procedural environment is entirely unfamiliar. The grand jury's broad subpoena power, the absence of cross-examination or confrontation rights, and the confidentiality constraints on what counsel can disclose to the client about the proceedings are features of U.S. federal practice that have no direct Japanese analog. YMF Law provides grand jury representation with direct communication — ensuring that Japanese company personnel and their leadership understand what is happening, what their obligations are, and what their options are, at every stage of the proceeding.
White Collar Crime
Federal criminal defense · Tax fraud · Financial crimes · obstruction of justice
White collar criminal defense — federal financial crimes, tax fraud, obstruction of justice, and the full range of corporate and individual criminal exposure that arises in complex business environments — requires the kind of defense counsel who understands how the government builds and presents its case. York built those instincts as a federal prosecutor, obtaining convictions on charges of obstruction of justice, conspiracy to defraud the United States, tax evasion, and related offenses. The range of matters on both sides of the table extends from financial fraud and tax crimes to matters involving espionage against the United States.
White collar defense begins well before charges are filed — in the internal investigation that determines what happened, the voluntary disclosure decision that shapes how the government responds, and the cooperation strategy that can be the difference between prosecution and declination. York's experience on the prosecution side of those decisions makes the advice on the defense side more than theoretical.
For Japanese executives and employees facing U.S. federal criminal exposure — whether through FCPA enforcement, securities fraud investigations, or other matters arising from their company's U.S. business activities — YMF Law provides white collar defense representation with direct Japanese-language communication. The gap between what a Japanese executive understands about U.S. federal criminal proceedings and what is actually happening can be outcome-determinative. Closing that gap is not a translation service. It is substantive legal counsel delivered in the client's language.
Tax Audits & Investigations
IRS audits · Criminal tax investigations · Trials · Appeals
Tax enforcement defense is where York's legal career began. The U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, Western Criminal Enforcement Section — the DOJ component responsible for federal criminal tax prosecution — is the office from which York was recruited to civil practice. That origin is directly relevant to tax defense work: the DOJ Tax Division's prosecutorial priorities, its referral relationship with the IRS Criminal Investigation division, and its policy approaches and strategic priorities are not abstract knowledge. They are the institutional context York worked within.
Tax matters in the YMF Law practice span the civil-criminal spectrum. Civil IRS audits and examinations — including transfer pricing examinations of Japanese company U.S. operations, which are among the IRS's highest-priority international enforcement activities — require the same discipline of evidentiary preparation and strategic positioning that defines the litigation practice broadly. Criminal tax investigations, which may begin as civil examinations and transition to IRS Criminal Investigation referrals or DOJ Tax Division grand jury proceedings, require the additional layer of criminal defense judgment about when cooperation serves the client and when it does not.
For Japanese companies with U.S. subsidiaries, transfer pricing — the pricing of intercompany transactions between the Japanese parent and its U.S. entity — is the most frequently examined area of IRS international enforcement. The IRS's examination of whether intercompany transactions are priced at arm's length requires both U.S. tax law expertise and the ability to work directly with Japanese parent company finance and legal teams who manage and document those transactions. YMF Law provides that coordination.
Cross-Border Investigations
Multi-jurisdictional enforcement · U.S.-Japan investigation coordination · Parallel proceedings
Complex investigations increasingly span multiple jurisdictions — U.S. DOJ and SEC enforcement proceedings running in parallel with Japanese FSA examinations, METI inquiries, or Tokyo District Prosecutors Office investigations. The strategic management of those parallel proceedings requires counsel who can operate in both systems simultaneously: understanding what each jurisdiction's investigators are looking for, how the privilege frameworks differ between U.S. and Japanese law, and how a disclosure or cooperation decision in one jurisdiction affects the client's position in the other.
YMF Law coordinates cross-border investigation defense for Japanese companies facing U.S. enforcement proceedings with Japan dimensions — working directly with Japanese legal counsel on the Japan-side proceedings while managing the U.S. investigation response. That coordination is not primarily logistical. It is substantive: the strategic decisions about what to produce, when to cooperate, and how to frame voluntary disclosure in the U.S. proceeding are made with direct knowledge of how those decisions will be received and evaluated in the parallel Japanese context.
Evidence collection across borders — including 28 U.S.C. § 1782 proceedings used to obtain U.S. evidence for foreign investigations, and the reverse challenge of responding to foreign evidence requests in U.S. proceedings — is managed as part of the overall cross-border strategy. The practical and legal constraints of collecting evidence from Japanese sources for U.S. proceedings, and the privilege and data protection issues that arise under Japanese law, are handled with the directness that comes from working in both systems rather than coordinating them from a distance.
Complex Commercial & Product Liability
Contract disputes · Technologically demanding product liability · Licensing disputes · IP-adjacent commercial litigation
Complex commercial litigation and product liability defense do not fit neatly under patent law or government investigations, but they arise in the same industries, before the same courts, and at the same level of stakes and technological complexity. Contract disputes in pharmaceutical, technology, and manufacturing contexts; licensing disagreements between companies whose primary relationship is IP-based; product liability claims arising from goods distributed in the U.S. market — these are matters that require a trial lawyer rather than a specialist, and a lawyer capable of building and managing the factual record that determines outcome.
For Japanese companies with U.S. commercial exposure — distribution agreements, supply chain disputes, manufacturing defect claims, and product liability actions arising from goods sold in the U.S. market — YMF Law provides trial-level commercial litigation capability with the Japan fluency the matter requires. A Japanese automotive supplier facing U.S. product liability claims, a Japanese pharmaceutical company disputing licensing terms with a U.S. partner, or a Japanese technology manufacturer defending against breach of contract claims in a U.S. federal court does not need separate counsel for the Japan dimension of its commercial dispute. It needs one lawyer who can manage both.
This practice is available both as lead counsel and as co-counsel within a larger litigation team assembled for the specific matter — consistent with the flexible engagement model that characterizes the broader YMF Law practice.
York M. Faulkner
York began his legal career as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, before building a 30-year civil practice tried across federal courts from Washington D.C. to Los Angeles. His connection to Japan predates his legal career — first established in 1984 and sustained through four decades of residency, language, and relationships — and informs a practice that operates with equal fluency on both sides of the Pacific.