Service & Results.

nyc criminal lawyers over 30 years of experienceWe Know How To Win Cases

Spodek Law Group handles tough cases
nationwide, that demand excellence.

Get Free Consultation

Faced 5+ Years in Prison

People Vs Joseph Amico

Covered by NYDaily News. Las Vegas man accused of threatening a prominent attorney and making vile remarks.

Faced 10+ Years in Prison

People Vs. Anna Sorokin

Covered by New York Times, and other outlets. Fake heiress accused of conning the city’s wealthy, and has an HBO special being made about her.

Faced 3+ Years in Prison

People Vs. Genevieve Sabourin

Accused of stalking Alec Baldwin. The case garnered nationwide attention, with USAToday, NYPost, and other media outlets following it closely.

Faced Potential Charges

Ghislaine Maxwell Juror

Juror who prompted calls for new Ghislaine Maxwell trial turns to lawyer who defended Anna Sorokin.

Why Choose Us

Clients can use our portal to track the status of their case, stay in touch with us, upload documents, and more.

Regardless of the type of situation you're facing, our attorneys are here to help you get quality representation.

We can setup consultations in person, over Zoom, or over the phone to help you. Bottom line, we're here to help you win your case.

Law in the Media

View All

Meet Todd Spodek


The Spodek Law Group understands how delicate high-profile cases can be, and has a strong track record of getting positive outcomes. Our lawyers service a clientele that is nationwide. With offices in both LA and NYC, and cases all across the country - Spodek Law Group is a top tier law firm.

Todd Spodek is a second generation attorney with immense experience. He has many years of experience handling 100’s of tough and hard to win trials. He’s been featured on major news outlets, such as New York Post, Newsweek, Fox 5 New York, South China Morning Post, Insider.com, and many others.

In 2022, Netflix released a series about one of Todd’s clients: Anna Delvey/Anna Sorokin.

Why Clients Choose Spodek Law Group

The reason is simple: clients want white glove service, and lawyers who can win. Every single client who works with the Spodek Law Group is aware that the attorney they hire could drastically change the outcome of their case. Hiring the Spodek Law Group means you’re taking your future seriously. Our lawyers handle cases nationwide, ranging from NYC to LA. Our philosophy is fair and simple: our nyc criminal lawyers only take on clients who we know will benefit from our services.

We’re selective about the clients we work with, and only take on cases we know align with our experience – and where we can make a difference. This is different from other law firms who are not invested in your success nor care about your outcome.

If you have a legal issue, call us for a consultation.
We are available 24/7, to help you with any – and all, challenges you face.

Responding to Burdensome or Overly Broad FTC Civil Investigative Demands

By Spodek Law Group | January 24, 2024
(Last Updated On: January 24, 2024)

Responding to Burdensome or Overly Broad FTC Civil Investigative Demands

When a company receives a civil investigative demand (CID) from the Federal Trade Commission, it can often feel overwhelming trying to respond, especially if the requests seem burdensome or overly broad. The FTC has broad authority to investigate potential violations of consumer protection laws, but companies do have some rights when responding to a CID.

Assessing the Scope of the FTC Investigation

The first step is to carefully review the CID and try to understand the scope of the FTC’s investigation. The CID should include a resolution from the FTC stating the nature and purpose of the investigation [1]. This will provide context for the information requests and can help assess whether they reasonably relate to the investigation.

If the purpose stated in the resolution seems overly broad or vague, that may form the basis for an objection. For example, if the resolution authorizes an investigation into “potential anticompetitive practices” without further detail, the company could argue the requests are not sufficiently tailored to a specific issue [2].

Evaluating Burden and Relevance

The company should also evaluate whether complying with the CID would be unduly burdensome or require producing information not reasonably relevant to the investigation. This involves assessing factors like:

  • The number and breadth of document requests
  • The timeframes covered
  • The number of custodians involved
  • The estimated cost and effort to retrieve and review responsive documents

If certain specifications seem disproportionate to the investigation’s scope, are duplicative of past productions, or inquire into sensitive or privileged information, the company can object on relevance or burden grounds [3].

Petition to Limit or Quash

The company can file a petition with the FTC Commissioner asking to limit or quash certain specifications in the CID. The petition must be filed within 20 days and should clearly state the objections and propose modifications to tailor the requests appropriately.

When asserting burden, it is helpful to provide concrete evidence through affidavits or expert testimony estimating the costs and resources required to fully respond. Prior FTC decisions limiting similar requests can also help demonstrate overbreadth or lack of relevance [4].

Seeking Judicial Review

If the FTC denies the petition, the company can seek judicial review in federal court. However, courts generally defer to the FTC’s broad investigative authority, so the burden remains high to prove unreasonableness or that requests fall outside the agency’s jurisdiction [5].

Nonetheless, seeking judicial review is still an important step to challenge problematic portions of a CID and protect the company’s rights. At a minimum, negotiations with the FTC may lead to beneficial limitations on scope even if court intervention is not secured.

Negotiating Limitations

Before resorting to litigation, the company should negotiate cooperatively with the FTC to narrow overbroad specifications. While the FTC cannot compromise on requests clearly within the purview of its investigation, discussions can focus on reducing burden through sampling protocols, date restrictions, or custodian limitations [6].

If negotiations reach an impasse, the company can reassert its objections through a petition or in court. But working constructively with FTC staff will demonstrate reasonableness and good faith efforts to respond appropriately.

Avoiding Privilege Waivers

The company must also be very careful not to inadvertently waive privileges or protections when responding to a CID. It is advisable to enter a confidentiality agreement with the FTC early in the process to guard against public disclosure of sensitive business information or trade secrets [7].

Additionally, the company should clearly designate any inadvertently produced privileged materials, such as attorney-client communications or attorney work product, in accordance with Federal Rule of Evidence 502. This avoids blanket privilege waivers and limits the waiver to that specific disclosure.

Avoiding Follow-On Litigation

The goal when responding to an FTC CID is to provide enough information to satisfy the investigation without fueling further enforcement actions. Admissions of past wrongdoing should be avoided. Instead, responses should emphasize the company’s commitment to compliance and willingness to remedy any potential issues.

If subsequent litigation does occur, early production of privileged documents or admissions made to FTC staff could come back to haunt the company. Counsel should always bear this risk in mind when interacting with agency representatives or answering specifications [8].


Responding to an expansive FTC CID can be a daunting task, but understanding the process and protecting your rights is critical. Companies should:

  • Carefully analyze the purpose and scope of FTC information requests
  • Object to unduly burdensome or irrelevant specifications
  • Attempt to negotiate reasonable limitations on scope
  • Avoid over-disclosure of sensitive business information
  • Prevent inadvertent privilege waivers

With the help of experienced legal counsel, companies can respond appropriately to CIDs and manage the inquiry without further escalation.

Free Consultation


I was searching for a law firm with some power to help me deal with a warrant in New York . After 6 days I decided to go with Spodek Law Group. It helped that This law firm is well respected by not only the top law firms in New York , but the DA , Judge as well. I...

~Fonder Brandon

5 Stars
It was my good fortune to retain Spodek Law Group for representation for my legal needs. From the beginning, communication was prompt and thorough. Todd, Kenneth and Alex were the first people I worked with and they all made me feel comfortable and confident that the team was going to work hard for me. Everything was explained and any concerns...

~A G

5 Stars
After meeting with several law firms, I chose the Spodek Law Group not only for their professionalism and experience, but for the personal attention given to me right from the initial consultation. It is important to recognize how crucial having the right legal team is when faced with potentially life altering events that impact families and the lives of loved...

~George Cherubini

Spodek Law Group

White Glove Service

We Provide Superior Service, Excellent Results, At A Level Superior To Other Criminal Defense Law Firms. Regardless Of Where Your Case Is, Nationwide, We Can Help You.
View More

Request Free Consultation

Please fill out the form below to receive a free consultation, we will respond to
your inquiry within 24-hours guaranteed.


85 Broad St 30th Floor, New York, NY 10004


get directions

Los Angeles

611 S Catalina St Suite 222, Los Angeles, CA 90005


get directions


35-37 36th St, 2nd Floor Astoria, NY 11106


get directions


195 Montague St., 14th Floor, Brooklyn, NY 11201


get directions
Call Now!