In In re Grand Jury Subpoena, No. 15-4080 (4th Cir. Mar. 23, 2016), the Fourth Circuit held that the crime-fraud exception applied where there was evidence that clients had caused their attorney to submit a written report to a private regulator for the purpose of covering up their wrongful conduct.  Prior to the grand jury investigation, a private regulator investigated suspicious activity of two traders who worked for a bank executing futures trades for large investors.  The lawyer hired by the bank to represent the traders met with the traders individually and collectively and then participated in the regulator’s interviews of the traders.  The lawyer then followed up with a written submission to the regulator, in which he asserted factual and legal defenses of the suspect trades, including a flat denial of wrongful conduct.  Later, the government began investigating the trades and issued a subpoena to the traders’ lawyer, seeking documents relating to the lawyer’s representation of the traders, including the regulator’s interviews and the subsequent written submission.  Following an in camera review, the court denied the lawyer’s motion to quash, finding that there was sufficient evidence to indicate that the traders’ communications with the lawyer were made ‘’precisely to further the Traders’ criminal scheme’’ by covering up their wrongful conduct.  Applying an abuse of discretion standard, the appellate court held that the district court did not clearly err in finding that the government had submitted sufficient, unrebutted evidence to support application of the crime-fraud exception.