Tag Archives: geyer

Former Security Contractor CEO Sentenced for Masterminding $31 Million Disadvantaged Small Business Fraud Scheme

Posted on by
The former chief executive officer of a Virginia-based security contracting firm was sentenced in the Eastern District of Virginia to 72 months in prison for creating a front company to obtain more than $31 million intended for disadvantaged small businesses and for bribing the former regional director for the National Capital Region of the Federal Protective Service (FPS) as part of the scheme. The front company obtained the contracts through the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Section 8(a) program, which allows qualified small businesses to receive sole-source and competitive-bid contracts set aside for minority-owned and disadvantaged small businesses.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney Neil H. MacBride of the Eastern District of Virginia; National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Inspector General Paul K. Martin; SBA Inspector General Peggy E. Gustafson; Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) Special Agent in Charge of Mid-Atlantic Field Office Robert E. Craig; General Services Administration (GSA) Inspector General Brian D. Miller; and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Deputy Inspector General Charles K. Edwards made the announcement after sentencing by United States District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee.

“Keith Hedman used his expertise gleaned from decades as a government contractor to cheat the system and steal tens of millions from minority-owned small business owners,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Raman. “Today’s sentence shows that those who resort to deceit and bribery to secure federal contracts will be caught and held accountable.”

“Keith Hedman tried to game the system and take advantage of a government program designed to help minority-owned small businesses,” said U.S. Attorney Neil H. MacBride.  “He committed fraud, he undermined the trust of the U.S. government and this type of conduct will not be tolerated.  My office is committed to prosecuting those who cheat the government to the fullest extent of the law.”    “I commend the outstanding efforts of our agents and the other law enforcement agencies involved in this case in protecting the integrity of the Federal Government’s procurement program and taxpayer dollars” said NASA Inspector General Paul K. Martin.

Keith Hedman, 53, of Arlington, Va., was sentenced today after pleading guilty to major government fraud and conspiracy to commit bribery on March 13, 2013. Hedman was also ordered to forfeit approximately $6.1 million.

According to court documents, in or about 2011 Hedman formed Company A, which was approved to participate in the 8(a) program based on the 8(a) eligibility of its listed president and CEO, an African-American female. When the listed president and CEO left Company A in 2003, Hedman became its sole owner, and the company was no longer 8(a)-eligible.

In 2003, Hedman created Company B, another Arlington-based security contractor, to ensure that he could continue to gain access to 8(a) contracting preferences for which Company A was no longer qualified. Prior to applying for Company B’s 8(a) status, Hedman selected an employee, Dawn Hamilton, 48, of Brownsville, Md., to serve as a figurehead owner based on her Portuguese heritage and history of social disadvantage. In reality, the new company was managed by Hedman and Company A senior leadership in violation of 8(a) rules and regulations. To deceive the SBA, the co-conspirators falsely claimed that Hamilton formed and founded the company and that she was the only member of the company’s management. Based on those misrepresentations, Company B obtained 8(a) status in 2004.

From 2004 through February 2012, Hedman – not Hamilton – impermissibly exercised ultimate decision-making authority and control over Company B by directing its finances, allocation of personnel, and government contracting activities.  Hedman nonetheless maintained the impression that Hamilton was leading the company, including through forgeries of signatures of Hamilton to documents she had not seen or drafted. Hedman also retained ultimate control over the shell business’s bank accounts throughout its existence.  In 2010, Hedman withdrew $1 million in cash from Company B’s accounts and gave the funds in cash to Hamilton and three other conspirators. In 2011, Hedman approached Hamilton’s brother about starting another shell company to continue the scheme.  The trio submitted another fraudulent application to the SBA, but it was rejected.

Later in 2011, Hedman agreed to pay Derek Matthews, 47, of Harwood, Md., the former FPS Regional Director for the National Capital Region, $50,000 and a percentage of new business in exchange for Matthews helping Company B obtain contracts.  During the bribery scheme, Matthews served as FPS Deputy Assistant Director for Operations, a law enforcement position in which he had daily oversight of physical security programs and oversight of approximately 13,000 FPS officers at approximately 9,000 federal buildings.

In total, the scheme netted government contracts valued at more than $153 million, from which Company B obtained more than $31 million in contract payments. The various conspirators netted more than $6.1 million that they were not entitled to receive from those payments. Seven other defendants have pleaded guilty in the scheme.

This case is being investigated by NASA Office of the Inspector General (OIG), the SBA -OIG, DCIS-OIG, GSA-OIG, and DHS-OIG, with assistance from the Defense Contract Audit Agency. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Chad Golder and Ryan Faulconer, a former Trial Attorney for the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section, are prosecuting the case on behalf of the United States.

United Technologies Corporation Liable for Over $473 Million for Inflating Prices on Aircraft Engines Sold to Air Force

Posted on by
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio found United Technologies Corporation liable for over $473 million in damages and penalties arising out of a contract to provide the Air Force with fighter aircraft engines for F-15 and F-16 aircraft between 1985 and 1990, the Justice Department announced today.  United Technologies, which is based in Connecticut, provides a broad range of high-technology products and services to the global aerospace and building systems industries.

“The department will relentlessly pursue justice against those who knowingly submit false claims to the government and abuse the public contracting process,” said Stuart Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division.  “It is vital that companies who do business with the government provide full and accurate information, and if they do not, they will pay the consequences.”

The government alleged that UTC’s proposed prices for the engine contract misrepresented how UTC calculated those prices, resulting in the government paying hundreds of millions more than it otherwise would have paid for the engines.  Specifically, the government alleged that UTC failed to include in its price proposal historical discounts that it received from suppliers, and instead knowingly used outdated information that excluded such discounts.

The government filed suit against UTC in 1999 under the False Claims Act and the common law, and those claims were tried, without a jury, in 2004.  An initial decision by the district court in 2008 found UTC liable under the False Claims Act, but did not award any damages.  The district court also dismissed the government’s common law claims.  That decision was appealed by both the government and UTC.  In 2010, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that UTC was liable under the False Claims Act, but reversed and remanded the case to the district court to recalculate the government’s damages and to reconsider the government’s common law claims.

In yesterday’s ruling, the district court awarded the government False Claims Act damages and penalties of $364 million, which is the highest recovery obtained by the government in a case tried under the Act.  The court also awarded an additional $109 million in damages on the government’s common law claims.  With the addition of prejudgment interest on the latter claims, which the court has yet to calculate, the government anticipates that the total judgment against United Technologies could be well in excess of half a billion dollars.    This case is being handled by the Civil Division of the Department of Justice.  The lawsuit is captioned United States of America v. United Technologies Corp., No. 3:99-cv-093 (S.D. Ohio).

GGLLP Alert: Changes to the False Claims Act Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Posted on by

Changes to the False Claims Act Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) made a number of significant changes to the False Claims Act, including the following:

Original Source Requirement.  A plaintiff may now overcome the public disclosure if he or she qualifies as an “original source.”  The PPACA revised the definition of this term.  Previously, an original source had to have “direct and independent knowledge of the information on which the allegations [were] based.”  Now, an original source may be a person who merely has “knowledge that is independent of and materially adds to the publicly disclosed allegations or transactions.”  See 31 U.S.C. 3730(e)(4)(B).

Changes to the Public Disclosure Bar.  Previously, relators were precluded from proceeding if there had been a public disclosure of information.  This disclosure could have occurred in news reports, a Freedom of Information Act response, court proceedings or in any number of ways.  Thus, the public disclosure bar often served as a basis for dismissal.  The PPACA amended the False Claims Act to allow the government to have the final say on whether a court could properly dismiss a case based on a public disclosure.  The statute now provides that “the court shall dismiss an action unless opposed by the Government, if substantially the same allegations or transaction alleged in the action or claim were publicly disclosed.”  See 31 U.S.C. 3730(e)(4)(A).

Overpayments.  In the prior law, there was confusion as to the “obligation” under the False Claims Act not to retain overpayments and when such overpayments had to be returned after their discovery.  Now, under the PPACA, overpayments under Medicare and Medicaid must be reported and returned within 60 days of discovery, or the date a corresponding hospital report is due.  The failure timely to report and return an overpayment exposes a provider to False Claims Act liability.

Statutory Anti-Kickback Liability. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute, 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7b(b) (AKS), makes it a crime for any person to solicit, receive, offer or pay remuneration (monetary or otherwise) in exchange for referring patients to receive certain services that are paid for by the government.  Previously, many courts had interpreted the False Claims Act to mean that claims submitted as a result of AKS violations were false claims and therefore gave rise to liability under the False Claims Act (in addition to AKS penalties). Even though this was the majority rule, some courts held otherwise and the issue was always present in every case.  The PPACA changed the language of the AKS to provide that claims submitted in violation of the AKS automatically constitute false claims for purposes of the False Claims Act.  Further, the new language provides that “a person need not have actual knowledge … or specific intent to commit a violation” of the AKS.

GeyerGorey LLP Establishes 24/7 Client Emergency Hotline

Posted on by

GeyerGorey LLP announced today that it had established a 24/7 Client Emergency Hotline that will always be answered “live” by a GeyerGorey attorney.  Current clients should expect to be provided with this telephone number in a separate, confidential communication.

Press Release