Deirdre M. Daly, United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, announced that NATALIE LEVINE, 33, of Scottsdale, Arizona, waived her right to be indicted and pleaded guilty today before U.S. District Judge Michael P. Shea in Hartford to one count of engaging in a kickback scheme that defrauded federal healthcare programs.
According to court documents and statements made in court, from approximately March 2013 to October 2014, LEVINE was employed by Insys Therapeutics, an Arizona-based pharmaceutical company that manufactured and sold Subsys, a fentanyl-based sublingual spray that was approved by the Food and Drug Administration solely for the management of breakthrough pain in cancer patients. LEVINE was a sales representative for the company and was responsible for covering the territories that included Connecticut, New Hampshire and Rhode Island.
In pleading guilty, LEVINE admitted that she induced certain medical practitioners, including an advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) in Connecticut, a physician’s assistant (PA) in New Hampshire, and a physician in Rhode Island, to prescribe Subsys by paying them to participate in hundreds of sham “Speaker Programs.” The Speaker Programs, which were typically held at high-end restaurants, were ostensibly designed to gather licensed healthcare professionals who had the capacity to prescribe Subsys and educate them about the drug. In truth, the events were usually just a gathering of friends and co-workers, most of whom did not have the ability to prescribe Subsys, and no educational component took place. “Speakers” were paid a fee that ranged from $1,000 to several thousand dollars for attending these dinners. At times, the sign-in sheets for the Speaker Programs were forged so as to make it appear that the programs had an appropriate audience of healthcare professionals.
The medical practitioners were paid thousands of dollars in illegal kickbacks in order to prescribe Subsys, and induce others to prescribe Subsys, over similar medications. Medicare Part D plans authorized payment for hundreds of Subsys prescriptions written by the three medical practitioners, resulting in a loss of approximately $4.5 million.
LEVINE pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to violate the anti-kickback law, an offense that carries a maximum term of imprisonment of five years and a fine of up to $250,000. Judge Shea scheduled sentencing for October 5, 2017.
This investigation is being conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with the assistance of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Tactical Diversion Squad. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Douglas P. Morabito and Richard M. Molot.
Several other individuals affiliated with Insys Therapeutics, and medical practitioners involved in this kickback scheme, have been charged in the District of Connecticut and in other Districts across the United States.
U.S. Attorney Daly encouraged individuals who suspect health care fraud to report it by calling the Health Care Fraud Task Force (203) 785-9270 or 1-800-HHS-TIPS.
An Arizona man and an Illinois woman each pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges today for their respective roles in liquidating and laundering victim payments generated through a massive telephone impersonation fraud and money laundering scheme perpetrated by India-based call centers.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Blanco of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Acting U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez of the Southern District of Texas, Executive Associate Director Peter T. Edge of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), Inspector General J. Russell George of the U.S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) and Inspector General John Roth of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHS-OIG) made the announcement.
Bhavesh Patel, 47, most recently residing in Gilbert, Arizona, pleaded guilty to money laundering conspiracy, in violation of Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 1956(h). Asmitaben Patel, 34, most recently residing in Willowbrook, Illinois, pleaded guilty to a conspiracy to commit fraud and money laundering offenses, in violation of Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 371. The pleas were entered before U.S. District Court Judge David Hittner of the Southern District of Texas. Sentencing dates are pending.
According to admissions made in connection with their respective pleas, Bhavesh Patel, Asmitaben Patel, and their co-conspirators perpetrated a complex scheme in which individuals from call centers located in Ahmedabad, India, impersonated officials from the IRS and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and engaged in other telephone call scams, in a ruse designed to defraud victims located throughout the U.S. Using information obtained from data brokers and other sources, call center operators targeted U.S. victims who were threatened with arrest, imprisonment, fines or deportation if they did not pay alleged monies owed to the government. Victims who agreed to pay the scammers were instructed how to provide payment, including by purchasing stored value cards or wiring money. Upon payment, the call centers would immediately turn to a network of “runners” based in the U.S. to liquidate and launder the fraudulently-obtained funds.
According to Bhavesh Patel’s guilty plea, beginning in or around January 2014, Bhavesh Patel managed the activities of a crew of runners, directing them to liquidate victim scam funds in areas in and around south and central Arizona per the instructions of conspirators from India-based call centers. Patel communicated via telephone about the liquidation of scam funds with both domestic and India-based co-defendants, and he and his crew used reloadable cards containing funds derived from victims by scam callers to purchase money orders and deposit them into various bank accounts as directed, in return for percentage-based commissions from his India-based co-defendants. Patel also admitted to receiving and using fake identification documents, including phony driver’s licenses, to retrieve victim scam payments in the form of wire transfers, and providing those fake documents to persons he managed for the same purpose.
Based on admissions in Asmitaben Patel’s guilty plea, beginning in or around July 2013, Asmitaben Patel served as a runner liquidating victim scam funds as part of a group of conspirators operating in and around the Chicago area. At the direction of a co-defendant, Patel used stored value cards that had been loaded with victim funds to buy money orders and deposit them into various bank accounts, including the account of a lead generating business in order to pay the company for leads it provided to co-conspirators that were ultimately used to facilitate the scam.
To date, Bhavesh Patel, Asmitaben Patel, 54 other individuals and five India-based call centers have been charged for their roles in the fraud and money laundering scheme in an indictment returned by a federal grand jury in the Southern District of Texas on Oct. 19, 2016. Including today’s pleas, a total of eleven defendants have pleaded guilty thus far in this case. Co-defendants Bharatkumar Patel, Ashvinbhai Chaudhari, Harsh Patel, Nilam Parikh, Hardik Patel, Rajubhai Patel, Viraj Patel, Dilipkumar A. Patel, and Fahad Ali previously pleaded guilty on various dates between April and June 2017.
The remaining defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
HSI, DHS-OIG and TIGTA led the investigation of this case. Also providing significant support were: the Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs; Ft. Bend County, Texas, Sheriff’s Office; police departments in Hoffman Estates and Naperville, Illinois, and Leonia, New Jersey; San Diego County District Attorney’s Office Family Protection and Elder Abuse Unit; U.S. Secret Service; U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Inspector General; IOC-2; INTERPOL Washington; USCIS; U.S. State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service; and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices in the Middle District of Alabama, Northern District of Alabama, District of Arizona, Central District of California, Northern District of California, District of Colorado, Northern District of Florida, Middle District of Florida, Northern District of Illinois, Northern District of Indiana, District of Nevada and District of New Jersey. The Federal Communications Commission’s Enforcement Bureau also provided assistance in TIGTA’s investigation.
Senior Trial Attorney Michael Sheckels and Trial Attorney Mona Sahaf of the Criminal Division’s Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section, Trial Attorney Robert Stapleton of the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys S. Mark McIntyre and Craig M. Feazel of the Southern District of Texas are prosecuting the case.
A Department of Justice website has been established to provide information about the case to already identified and potential victims and the public. Anyone who believes they may be a victim of fraud or identity theft in relation to this investigation or other telefraud scam phone calls may contact the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) via this website.
Anyone who wants additional information about telefraud scams generally, or preventing identity theft or fraudulent use of their identity information, may obtain helpful information on the IRS tax scams website, the FTC phone scam website and the FTC identity theft website.
A former Audi manager has been charged via criminal complaint for his role in the long-running conspiracy to defraud U.S. regulators and customers by implementing software specifically designed to cheat U.S. emissions tests in thousands of Audi “clean diesel” vehicles.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Blanco of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jean E. Williams of the Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division, and Acting U.S. Attorney Daniel L. Lemisch of the Eastern District of Michigan made the announcement.
Giovanni Pamio, 60, an Italian citizen, is charged with conspiracy to defraud the U.S., wire fraud, and violation of the Clean Air Act. Pamio was formerly head of Thermodynamics within Audi’s Diesel Engine Development Department in Neckarsulm, Germany. According to the complaint, from in or about 2006 until in or about November 2015, Pamio led a team of engineers responsible for designing emissions control systems to meet emissions standards, including for nitrogen oxides (“NOx”), for diesel vehicles in the U.S.
According to the complaint, after Pamio and coconspirators realized that it was impossible to calibrate a diesel engine that would meet NOx emissions standards within the design constraints imposed by other departments at the company, Pamio directed Audi employees to design and implement software functions to cheat the standard U.S. emissions tests. Pamio and coconspirators deliberately failed to disclose the software functions, and they knowingly misrepresented that the vehicles complied with U.S. NOx emissions standards, the complaint alleges.
Audi’s parent company, Volkswagen AG (VW), previously pleaded guilty to three felony counts connected to cheating U.S. emissions standards. The company was ordered to pay a $2.8 billion criminal fine at its sentencing on April 21, 2017.
A complaint is merely an allegation and all defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
The FBI and EPA-CID investigated the case. This case is being prosecuted by Securities and Financial Fraud Chief Benjamin D. Singer and Trial Attorneys David Fuhr and Christopher Fenton of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section, Senior Trial Attorney Jennifer Blackwell and Trial Attorney Joel La Bissonniere of the Environment and Natural Resources Division’s Environmental Crime Section, and White Collar Crime Unit Chief John K. Neal and Assistant United States Attorney Timothy J. Wyse of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan. The Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs also assisted in the case.
If you get lost, sometimes you must go back and start again from the beginning. I’ve been a bit lost on whether the Sherman Act is unconstitutional as a criminal statute. It is well accepted that per se violations of the Sherman Act can be prosecuted criminally. An individual can be sentenced to up to ten years in prison. But, is the accepted learning on this issue wrong? I think I’ve found my way to the Sherman Act being unconstitutional as a criminal statute.
Forget everything you know about Supreme Court jurisprudence involving the criminal application of the Sherman Act (that was easy for me). Take a look at the statute:
Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal.
Can you advise your client what exactly is declared to be illegal? And watch his face show even more alarm when you explain that whatever it is that he can’t do, if he does do it, the penalty is up to 10 years in prison. The Sherman Act is void for vagueness. Justice Sutherland explained the void for vagueness doctrine in Connally v. General Construction Co, 269 U.S. 385, 391 (1926):
The terms of a penal statute…must be sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to it what conduct on their part will render them liable to its penalties….and a statue which either forbids or requires the doing of an act so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due process of law.
The Sherman Act does not sufficiently inform business people (including foreigners) what conduct can land them in jail or on a Red Notice. This must be true because even the Supreme Court has said the Sherman Act cannot possibly mean what it says because every contract is in restraint of trade, and every contract cannot be illegal. Thus, the first Supreme Court triage on the Sherman Act was that only “unreasonable restraints” of trade were prohibited. But, that doesn’t clear things up too much—What is an unreasonable restraint of trade? Under the Rule of Reason, a restraint is unlawful only, if after an inquiry to balance the pro-competitive benefits of the agreement versus its anticompetitive effects, the agreement is found to unreasonably restrain trade. But can you find someone guilty of a crime after weighing the pro-competitive and anticompetitive effects of the agreement? That doesn’t seem like the notice required by due process either. Further Supreme Court surgery on the Sherman Act separated out per se violations–restraints of trade that are so highly unlikely to have any redeeming competitive benefits, that the restraints (price-fixing, bid rigging and customer/market allocation) are per se illegal. As a result, juries are charged in a criminal antitrust case that they do not need to find that the restraint was unreasonable, but simply that the defendant(s) entered into an agreement to fix prices, which, by judicial fiat, is per se unreasonable.
Does the per se rule solve the void for vagueness problem? The conventional wisdom is that it has. But changed circumstances sometimes compel a “fresh look” at accepted wisdom. It is time for that fresh look. The changed circumstance that comes to mind is that the Sherman Act is no longer a misdemeanor. It is not a “gentlemen’s crime” meriting a slap on the wrist with a mild scolding from the judge. The Sherman Act, as a criminal statute, provides for an individual to be sentenced to up to 10 years in jail. And the ten years is not just theoretical; the Antitrust Division sought a 10-year prison sentence for the CEO of AU Optronics after his conviction. While the ten-year sentence was not achieved, the record prison sentence for a criminal antitrust violation is now 5 years. 
I am not a constitutional scholar, but I do have a blog so I’ll opine what I think is wrong with the Sherman Act as a criminal statute. First, the Supreme Court cannot save a criminal statute by grafting on elements such as condemning only “unreasonable” restraints of trade, and further holding that only certain types of agreements are per se unreasonable. But even if the Supreme Court could address the void for vagueness doctrine by holding that only certain restraints are per se illegal, this violates another constitutional tenet; the Supreme Court takes away the issue from the jury with an unrebuttable presumption. Charles D. Heller has written on this subject and argued that the current practice of instructing the jury that price-fixing is per se illegal, i.e., presumptively unreasonable, is unconstitutional. The jury should be the fact-finder of whether a restraint is unreasonable. Finally, the definition of a per se offense is that the restraint (price-fixing for e.g.) is so highly likely to be anticompetitive that there is no inquiry as to whether the actual restraint the defendant is charged with was anticompetitive. This may be fine for a civil case, but in a criminal case the defendant must be allowed to argue that the charged restraint was the exception to the rule. Instead, in a criminal case the jury may be charged:
It is not a defense that the parties may have acted with good motives, or may have thought that what they were doing was legal, or that the conspiracy may have had some good results.
This seems like a very odd jury instruction for a crime that carries a ten-year maximum prison sentence, especially when one considers that many of the defendants in criminal antitrust indictments are foreigners.
In short, the Sherman Act is void for vagueness. But, if the Act does pass the void for vagueness hurdle by grafting on the per se rule, juries should decide whether the restraint in question is unreasonable, and that inquiry should not be contained by a presumption the restraint was per se unreasonable if it was price-fixing, bid rigging or market allocation. If these standards were applied, however, the Sherman Act would be unworkable. If juries decided, in an after the fact deliberation, whether a restraint was unreasonable, the void for vagueness doctrine would trump a conviction. Sad. Very sad.
My solution to the problem, if there really is a problem, will come as soon as I figure it out—but no later than next week– in Part II.
Thanks for reading. Comments would be much appreciated, but maybe hold your fire until after Part II?
 I am not the first to reach this conclusion. The work of several other authors who find likewise is mentioned in the post.
 Maybe this language that is in Sherman Act indictments will clear things up: “For the purpose of forming and carrying out the charged combination and conspiracy, the defendant and his co-conspirators did those things that they combined and conspired to do.” To be fair, the indictments then “bullet point” a list of acts the defendant(s) engaged in to carry out the conspiracy.
 Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States, 221 U.S. 1 (1911).
 I was a brand new Antitrust Division attorney in one trial where we obtained convictions not too long after Sherman Act had been made a felony. At sentencing, the first convicted defendant got a wicked tongue lashing, but the judge said that, due to his youth and relative inexperience, he would not be sentenced to prison. The next defendant—ditto on the tongue lashing—but the judge found he should not be sentenced to prison because he was elderly and now retired.
An Ohio man was convicted yesterday after a two-day jury trial in the Western District of North Carolina for his role in a Costa Rican telemarketing scheme.
Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and Acting U.S. Attorney Jill Westmoreland Rose of the Western District of North Carolina made the announcement.
Paul Ronald Toth Jr., 40, of Wintersville, Ohio, was convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering and six counts of international money-laundering concealment. Sentencing before U.S. District Judge Robert J. Conrad Jr. of the Western District of North Carolina will be scheduled at a later date.
According to the evidence presented at trial, Toth was involved in a telemarketing scheme in which his co-conspirators contacted U.S. residents from call centers in Costa Rica, falsely informing them that they had won substantial cash prizes in “sweepstakes.” To claim the cash prizes, the victims – many of whom were elderly – were instructed to send a purported “refundable insurance fee.”
The trial evidence showed that, between approximately November 2009 and November 2010, Toth was a United States-based “smasher” who facilitated the laundering of funds received from the elderly victims. Specifically, according to the evidence presented at trial, Toth and others he recruited and supervised received over $300,000 from victims and, using various individuals as senders and recipients to conceal the fraudulent nature of the transactions, wired over $200,000 of those funds to co-conspirators in Costa Rica. The evidence further demonstrated that Toth kept the remainder as his profit.
This case is being investigated by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service, Federal Trade Commission and Department of Homeland Security. The case is being prosecuted by Senior Litigation Counsel Patrick Donley and Trial Attorneys William Bowne and Anna Kaminska of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section.
Three Virgin Islands men were charged in an indictment unsealed today with various offenses based on their participation in a bribery scheme involving over $17 million in construction contracts awarded by the Virgin Islands Public Finance Authority (VIPFA).
Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Ronald W. Sharpe of the District of the Virgin Islands, Special Agent in Charge Carlos Cases of the FBI’s San Juan, Puerto Rico, Division, Virgin Islands Inspector General Steven Van Beverhoudt and Special Agent in Charge Kelly R. Jackson of the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) made the announcement.
Julito Francis, 53, former Director of Finance and Administration for the VIPFA, is charged with 11 counts of conspiracy, bribery, extortion under color of official right, honest services wire fraud and perjury. Gerard Castor, 69, president and owner of Balbo Construction Corporation, is charged with 10 counts of conspiracy, bribery and honest services wire fraud. John Woods, 59, co-principal of an architectural company that worked on behalf of the VIPFA, is charged with three counts of conspiracy, bribery and extortion under color of official right.
Francis, Castor and Woods were arrested earlier today and appeared before U.S. Magistrate Judge Ruth Miller of the District of the Virgin Islands. The defendants were released pending an August 12 arraignment.
According to the indictment, Castor provided more than $400,000 in improvements to Francis’ personal residence, and over $10,000 in improvements to Woods’ personal property. In return, Francis and Woods used their official positions to ensure that Balbo Construction was awarded construction contracts by the VIPFA that were worth over $17 million, including a multi-million contract, and supplements thereto, to build the St. Thomas Regional Library. The indictment further alleges that the defendants attempted to conceal the bribery scheme by creating false documents that suggested Francis and Woods intended to pay Castor for the work performed.
The charges and allegations contained in an indictment are merely accusations. The defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
This case is being investigated by the FBI’s San Juan Division, St. Thomas Resident Agency, the Virgin Islands Office of the Inspector General and IRS-CI. This case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Laura Fulton and Justin D. Weitz of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Nelson Jones of the District of the Virgin Islands. Deputy Chief Tracee Plowell of the Criminal Division’s Office of Enforcement Operations and Trial Attorney Jennifer Blackwell of the Environment and Natural Resources Division’s Environmental Crimes Section participated in the investigation when they were assigned to the Public Integrity Section.
Our attorneys have led and participated in some of the highest profile matters in the past decade, both while in the government and in private practice. We have been involved in the most significant criminal cartel cases, the most important mergers, the most notable civil antitrust investigations, the largest procurement fraud cases, and game-changing antitrust cases that reached the United States Supreme Court. Our collective experience stands as a testament to our work ethic, our drive for excellence, and the trust and responsibility we have been given by our clients and the government.
Led investigation and prosecution of marine contractors engaged in conspiracy to suppress and eliminate competition to install deep sea oil platforms
Led investigation and prosecution of international freight forwarders engaged in conspiracy to fix prices on international air cargo shipments
Led investigation and prosecution of household-goods moving contractors engaged in conspiracy to fix prices for international moving services provided to Department of Defense
Investigation and prosecution of graphite electrodes manufacturers
Investigation and prosecution of ocean shipping companies
Investigation and prosecution of a FTSE 250 engineering company that resulted in the indictment, extradition and conviction of its former chief executive
Defended foreign construction company in investigation and prosecution of alleged billion-dollar bid rigging scheme, in related qui tam litigation, and in other related matters
Defended foreign vitamin manufacturers in investigations and prosecutions of alleged international price-fixing agreements
Defended foreign specialty chemical manufacturers in investigations and prosecutions of alleged international price-fixing agreements
Defended U.S.-based executive of foreign company in criminal and civil litigation related to his alleged role in an international cartel to fix prices in the marine supply industry
Defended foreign executive of foreign company in criminal and civil litigation related to his alleged role in the conspiracy to fix air cargo rates around the world
Defended international freight forwarder in criminal litigation related to its alleged role in an international conspiracy to rig bids on U.S. military shipping contracts
Investigation and subsequent prosecution of foreign vitamin manufacturers for price fixing conspiracy
Domestic Price Fixing and Bid Rigging:
Defended electrical products manufacturer in first felony prosecution under the Sherman Act and in civil treble damage litigation
Represented a class of nurses in litigation against a hospital association and a number of Arizona hospitals
Represented the State of Ohio against a number of dairies for allegedly rigging bids of school milk
Investigation and prosecution of highway paving contractors in multiple districts for bid rigging
Investigation and prosecution of military insignia providers supplying the Army Air Force Exchange System with over 4,000 items of insignia
Represented metal drum manufacturer in prosecution for price fixing
Investigation of polypropylene bag manufacturers and that resulted in the prosecution of a manufacturer for Buy American Act violations and conspiracy to defraud
Investigation and prosecution of nearly 40 cases against paving contractors for conspiring to rig bids in connection with federal and state highway and airport contracts
Investigation and prosecution of an auction rigging conspiracy involving auto parts to by the Department of Defense at Defense Reutilization Marketing Offices (DRMO)
Investigation and prosecution of multiple electrical construction contractors for conspiring to rig bids for major power wiring contracts associated with steel mills and waste water treatment plants
Investigation and prosecution of multiple wholesale grocery companies and bid managers for rigging bids to school districts, hospitals and jails in southern Texas
Investigation and prosecution of multiple dairies for rigging bids for school milk sold to districts in Louisiana
Investigation and prosecution of crawfish processors for fixing prices paid to crawfish farmers and fishermen
Investigation and prosecution of bribery conspiracy involving the reconstruction of the New Orleans levee system after Hurricane Katrina
Investigation and prosecution of fire protective services company and its president
Investigation and prosecution of an Iraq-based general construction bid rigging scheme
Investigation and prosecution of conspiracy to solicit kickback scheme involving security services on a US Agency for International Development contract
Investigation and prosecution of fuel theft from an overseas United States military facility
Investigation and prosecution of a Europe-based scheme to defraud the Iraqi government by facilitating the fraudulent claim for payment of armored vehicles that were never delivered
Represented individual accused of defrauding government defense agency out of hundreds of thousands of dollars of grant money
Represented company accused of defrauding government by failing to supply vitamin-enriched food products with the proper level of enrichment
Represented large computer software company in internal investigation of improper influence on government contracting process
Defended CEO and three closely-held companies in a multi-state racketeering and tax fraud prosecution
Investigation and prosecution of multiple labor racketeering cases ranging from prosecutions of United Mine Worker Union officials for theft of union funds used to pay for the murder of a political opponent of the union president to the prosecution of two Boston-based racketeers for actions associated with their travel to California in connection with a union organizing effort at a San Rafael newspaper
Investigation and prosecution of the mayor of a New Jersey town for taking bribes in connection with the permitting of a tank farm at the terminus point of a major Gulf Coast to East Coast pipeline
Investigation and prosecution of the most prolific serial bank robber in United States history
Investigation and prosecution of the murder for hire of a government witness and one of the largest cocaine importation conspiracies East of the Mississippi River
Investigation and prosecution of numerous gun, drug and false identity cases
Investigation and prosecution of multiple obstructions of justice, contempt, false statement, witness tampering and perjury cases arising out of grand jury investigations
Investigation and prosecution of bank fraud cases
Represented individuals before the District of Columbia Court of Appeals in appeals from criminal convictions (more than a dozen cases)
Defended individual in intelligence community in investigation by DCIS for alleged violations of public corruption statutes (18 U.S.C §§ 207 & 208)
Defended individual in criminal investigation by Inspector General of NASA
Defended individual in federal bribery investigation
Defended government contractor in investigation by the Inspector General of the Department of Agriculture
Defended several regional hospitals in various unrelated federal investigations of allegedly fraudulent billing practices, Stark violations
Represented hospital CEO in investigation of alleged Stark violations
Represented pathology laboratory in healthcare fraud investigation
Represented national healthcare company in investigation of allegedly criminal off-label marketing
Represented various individuals in applications for presidential pardons
Mergers and Acquisitions:
Represented Warner Music in connection with the proposed acquisition of EMI by Universal Music
Represented DISH Network in opposition to the proposed acquisition of T-Mobile by AT&T
Represented Merck in connection with its acquisition of Schering Plough
Represented Simon Properties in connection with its acquisition of Prime Outlets
Obtained antitrust clearance in the acquisition of Liquid Container by Graham Packaging
Obtained consent decree against nuclear engineering firm which had acquired another firm with the same engineering specialty
Represented major home healthcare provider in acquisition valued in excess of $500 million
Represented pathology laboratory in merger valued in excess of $100 million
Represented foreign mining company in acquisition of US coal mines valued over $1 billion
Represented hospital management company in acquisition valued in excess of $500 million
Represented individual in several acquisitions of stock each valued in excess of $100 million
Represented major over-the-counter pharmaceutical company in four different acquisitions over several years whose values ranged from over $100 million to over $500 million
Represented national restaurant chain in acquisition valued at about $1 billion
Represented regional hospital chain in acquisition of a hospital valued above $50 million
Represented hospital valued in excess of $100 million in sale to state hospital system
Civil Antitrust Matters:.
Defended large telecommunications provider in three week trial for alleged exclusionary conduct directed towards telecom services resellers.
Represented large telecommunications provider as plaintiff in case alleging monopolization of market for telecom switch software.
Represented leading music copyright licensing organization in a decade-long investigation by the Department of Justice
Led the investigation of Ticketmaster at the Department of Justice
Led major, successful prosecution by United States Department of Justice of conspiracy among twenty-four leading market-makers in NASDAQ stocks, including Goldman, Sachs & Co. and J. P. Morgan Securities, Inc. who had conspired to maintain spreads between buying and selling prices of NASDAQ stocks
Defended large telecommunications provider in multi-year litigation brought by competitive telecom carrier alleging monopolization of market for high speed data services
Led successful investigation and prosecution of Salomon Bros Inc. and two hedge funds, Caxton Corporation and Steinhardt Partners, LP, to limit the supply of two-year Treasury notes to the “repo,” or “repurchase agreement,” market
Successfully brought the Reagan Administrations ‘s first challenge to a merger (brewing industry)
Successfully represented the United States in a litigated matter challenging field of use restrictions in patent licensing agreement in specialty chemicals
Successfully represented the United States in challenge to professional rules of conduct limiting competition among accountants in Texas
Successfully represented the United States in challenge to acquisition by Texaco, Inc. of an independent oil refining company
Represented high-tech electronic service provider with respect to antitrust issues in a bet-the-company patent infringement case
Represented sporting goods manufacturer in vacating a consent decree
Represented leading music copyright pool in civil antitrust investigation leading to vacating of an earlier consent decree and modification of another consent decree
Represented hospital CEO in litigation arising from denial of physician staff privileges
Antitrust Compliance Counseling:
Advised large telecommunications provider on its price and product bundling
Advised large telecom provider in connection with a joint venture of three carriers to entire the mobile payments market with mobile phones
Advised major manufacturer of household appliances on antitrust compliance
Advised major manufacturer of high-end kitchen appliances on antitrust compliance
Advised major manufacturer of over-the-counter pharmaceutical on antitrust compliance
Advised regional airport on state action doctrine and compliance with antitrust laws
Advised national trade association on antitrust compliance and Noerr-Pennington doctrine
Advised international shipping company on compliance regarding competition, fraud, and foreign corrupt practices
Advised African government on contracting and anti-fraud and anti-corruption best practices
Other Civil Litigation:
Represented Haiti in multinational investigation and litigation leading to the recovery of money stolen by its former president Jean-Claude Duvalier