Iraqi-Based Construction Company Pays $2.7 Million to U.s. for Alleged False Claims in Bribery Scheme

Iraqi Consultants and Construction Bureau (ICCB) has paid the U.S. $2.7 million to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act by bribing a U.S. government official to obtain U.S. government contracts in Iraq, the Department of Justice announced today.  ICCB is a privately owned construction company headquartered in Baghdad, Iraq.

“Bribery will not be tolerated in government contracting,” said Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Division Stuart F. Delery.  “We will ensure that government contracts are awarded based on merit and pursue allegations of fraudulently procured contracts wherever they occur.”

The government alleged that, from 2007 to 2008, ICCB paid bribes to Army Corps of Engineers procurement official John Salama Markus, 41, of Nazareth, Pa., to obtain information that gave it an advantage in bidding on several construction contracts with the Department of Defense in Iraq.  The contracts supported reconstruction efforts involving the Iraq war, including infrastructure and security projects and the building of medical facilities and schools.  ICCB then knowingly overcharged the U.S. for services provided under the contracts, according to the government’s allegation.

“It is offensive that anyone would see projects to promote stability, health and education in a rebuilding country as a way to make illegal cash on the side,” said U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey Paul J. Fishman.  “We will not abide companies paying to play in such a system.”

“The Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) is committed to protecting the integrity of the Defense acquisition process from personal and corporate avarice,” said Special Agent in Charge, DCIS Northeast Field Office Craig Rupert.  “Ensuring the proper use of U.S. taxpayers’ dollars and preventing contract fraud is in our nation’s interest and remains a priority.”

The settlement is part of a larger investigation initiated by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey.  As part of that investigation, Markus pleaded guilty on Sept. 7, 2012, to wire fraud, money laundering and failure to report a foreign bank account in connection with more than $50 million in contracts awarded to foreign companies in Gulf Region North, Iraq.  Markus was sentenced to 13 years in prison on March 12, 2013, in Newark, N.J., federal court.

The investigation is being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey and the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, in cooperation with the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, the Major Procurement Fraud Unit of the Army’s Criminal Investigation Command, the Criminal Investigative Division of the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Homeland Security.  The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only; there has been no determination of liability.

Johnson & Johnson to Pay More Than $2.2 Billion to Resolve Criminal and Civil Investigations (last matter GeyerGorey’s Patricia Davis worked prior to her retiring from USDOJ and joining our firm)

WASHINGTON – Global health care giant Johnson & Johnson (J&J) and its subsidiaries will pay more than $2.2 billion to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from allegations relating to the prescription drugs Risperdal, Invega and Natrecor, including promotion for uses not approved as safe and effective by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and payment of kickbacks to physicians and to the nation’s largest long-term care pharmacy provider.  The global resolution is one of the largest health care fraud settlements in U.S. history, including criminal fines and forfeiture totaling $485 million and civil settlements with the federal government and states totaling $1.72 billion.

“The conduct at issue in this case jeopardized the health and safety of patients and damaged the public trust,” said Attorney General Eric Holder.  “This multibillion-dollar resolution demonstrates the Justice Department’s firm commitment to preventing and combating all forms of health care fraud.  And it proves our determination to hold accountable any corporation that breaks the law and enriches its bottom line at the expense of the American people.”

The resolution includes criminal fines and forfeiture for violations of the law and civil settlements based on the False Claims Act arising out of multiple investigations of the company and its subsidiaries.

“When companies put profit over patients’ health and misuse taxpayer dollars, we demand accountability,” said Associate Attorney General Tony West.  “In addition to significant monetary sanctions, we will ensure that non-monetary measures are in place to facilitate change in corporate behavior and help ensure the playing field is level for all market participants.”

In addition to imposing substantial monetary sanctions, the resolution will subject J&J to stringent requirements under a Corporate Integrity Agreement (CIA) with the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG).  This agreement is designed to increase accountability and transparency and prevent future fraud and abuse.

“As patients and consumers, we have a right to rely upon the claims drug companies make about their products,” said Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Division Stuart F. Delery.  “And, as taxpayers, we have a right to ensure that federal health care dollars are spent appropriately.  That is why this Administration has continued to pursue aggressively – with all of our available law enforcement tools — those companies that corrupt our health care system.”

J&J Subsidiary Janssen Pleads Guilty to Misbranding Antipsychotic Drug

In a criminal information filed today in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the government charged that, from March 3, 2002, through Dec. 31, 2003, Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc., a J&J subsidiary, introduced the antipsychotic drug Risperdal into interstate commerce for an unapproved use, rendering the product misbranded.  For most of this time period, Risperdal was approved only to treat schizophrenia.  The information alleges that Janssen’s sales representatives promoted Risperdal to physicians and other prescribers who treated elderly dementia patients by urging the prescribers to use Risperdal to treat symptoms such as anxiety, agitation, depression, hostility and confusion.  The information alleges that the company created written sales aids for use by Janssen’s ElderCare sales force that emphasized symptoms and minimized any mention of the FDA-approved use, treatment of schizophrenia.  The company also provided incentives for off-label promotion and intended use by basing sales representatives’ bonuses on total sales of Risperdal in their sales areas, not just sales for FDA-approved uses.

In a plea agreement resolving these charges, Janssen admitted that it promoted Risperdal to health care providers for treatment of psychotic symptoms and associated behavioral disturbances exhibited by elderly, non-schizophrenic dementia patients.  Under the terms of the plea agreement, Janssen will pay a total of $400 million, including a criminal fine of $334 million and forfeiture of $66 million.  Janssen’s guilty plea will not be final until accepted by the U.S. District Court.

The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) protects the health and safety of the public by ensuring, among other things, that drugs intended for use in humans are safe and effective for their intended uses and that the labeling of such drugs bear true, complete and accurate information.  Under the FDCA, a pharmaceutical company must specify the intended uses of a drug in its new drug application to the FDA.  Before approval, the FDA must determine that the drug is safe and effective for those specified uses.  Once the drug is approved, if the company intends a different use and then introduces the drug into interstate commerce for that new, unapproved use, the drug becomes misbranded.  The unapproved use is also known as an “off-label” use because it is not included in the drug’s FDA-approved labeling.

“When pharmaceutical companies interfere with the FDA’s mission of ensuring that drugs are safe and effective for the American public, they undermine the doctor-patient relationship and put the health and safety of patients at risk,” said Director of the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations John Roth.  “Today’s settlement demonstrates the government’s continued focus on pharmaceutical companies that put profits ahead of the public’s health.  The FDA will continue to devote resources to criminal investigations targeting pharmaceutical companies that disregard the drug approval process and recklessly promote drugs for uses that have not been proven to be safe and effective.”

J&J and Janssen Settle Civil Allegations of Targeting Vulnerable Patients  with the Drugs Risperdal and Invega for Off-Label Uses

In a related civil complaint filed today in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States alleges that Janssen marketed Risperdal to control the behaviors and conduct of the nation’s most vulnerable patients: elderly nursing home residents, children and individuals with mental disabilities.  The government alleges that J&J and Janssen caused false claims to be submitted to federal health care programs by promoting Risperdal for off-label uses that federal health care programs did not cover, making false and misleading statements about the safety and efficacy of Risperdal and paying kickbacks to physicians to prescribe Risperdal.

“J&J’s promotion of Risperdal for unapproved uses threatened the most vulnerable populations of our society – children, the elderly and those with developmental disabilities,” said U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Zane Memeger.  “This historic settlement sends the message that drug manufacturers who place profits over patient care will face severe criminal and civil penalties.”

In its complaint, the government alleges that the FDA repeatedly advised Janssen that marketing Risperdal as safe and effective for the elderly would be “misleading.”  The FDA cautioned Janssen that behavioral disturbances in elderly dementia patients were not necessarily manifestations of psychotic disorders and might even be “appropriate responses to the deplorable conditions under which some demented patients are housed, thus raising an ethical question regarding the use of an antipsychotic medication for inappropriate behavioral control.”

The complaint further alleges that J&J and Janssen were aware that Risperdal posed serious health risks for the elderly, including an increased risk of strokes, but that the companies downplayed these risks.  For example, when a J&J study of Risperdal showed a significant risk of strokes and other adverse events in elderly dementia patients, the complaint alleges that Janssen combined the study data with other studies to make it appear that there was a lower overall risk of adverse events.  A year after J&J had received the results of a second study confirming the increased safety risk for elderly patients taking Risperdal, but had not published the data, one physician who worked on the study cautioned Janssen that “[a]t this point, so long after [the study] has been completed … we must be concerned that this gives the strong appearance that Janssen is purposely withholding the findings.”

The complaint also alleges that Janssen knew that patients taking Risperdal had an increased risk of developing diabetes, but nonetheless promoted Risperdal as “uncompromised by safety concerns (does not cause diabetes).”  When Janssen received the initial results of studies indicating that Risperdal posed the same diabetes risk as other antipsychotics, the complaint alleges that the company retained outside consultants to re-analyze the study results and ultimately published articles stating that Risperdal was actually associated with a lower risk of developing diabetes.

The complaint alleges that, despite the FDA warnings and increased health risks, from 1999 through 2005, Janssen aggressively marketed Risperdal to control behavioral disturbances in dementia patients through an “ElderCare sales force” designed to target nursing homes and doctors who treated the elderly.  In business plans, Janssen’s goal was to “[m]aximize and grow RISPERDAL’s market leadership in geriatrics and long term care.”  The company touted Risperdal as having “proven efficacy” and “an excellent safety and tolerability profile” in geriatric patients.

In addition to promoting Risperdal for elderly dementia patients, from 1999 through 2005, Janssen allegedly promoted the antipsychotic drug for use in children and individuals with mental disabilities.  The complaint alleges that J&J and Janssen knew that Risperdal posed certain health risks to children, including the risk of elevated levels of prolactin, a hormone that can stimulate breast development and milk production.  Nonetheless, one of Janssen’s Key Base Business Goals was to grow and protect the drug’s market share with child/adolescent patients.  Janssen instructed its sales representatives to call on child psychiatrists, as well as mental health facilities that primarily treated children, and to market Risperdal as safe and effective for symptoms of various childhood disorders, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder and autism.  Until late 2006, Risperdal was not approved for use in children for any purpose, and the FDA repeatedly warned the company against promoting it for use in children.

The government’s complaint also contains allegations that Janssen paid speaker fees to doctors to influence them to write prescriptions for Risperdal.  Sales representatives allegedly told these doctors that if they wanted to receive payments for speaking, they needed to increase their Risperdal prescriptions.

In addition to allegations relating to Risperdal, today’s settlement also resolves allegations relating to Invega, a newer antipsychotic drug also sold by Janssen.  Although Invega was approved only for the treatment of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder, the government alleges that, from 2006 through 2009, J&J and Janssen marketed the drug for off-label indications and made false and misleading statements about its safety and efficacy.

As part of the global resolution, J&J and Janssen have agreed to pay a total of $1.391 billion to resolve the false claims allegedly resulting from their off-label marketing and kickbacks for Risperdal and Invega.  This total includes $1.273 billion to be paid as part of the resolution announced today, as well as $118 million that J&J and Janssen paid to the state of Texas in March 2012 to resolve similar allegations relating to Risperdal.  Because Medicaid is a joint federal-state program, J&J’s conduct caused losses to both the federal and state governments.  The additional payment made by J&J as part of today’s settlement will be shared between the federal and state governments, with the federal government recovering $749 million, and the states recovering $524 million.  The federal government and Texas each received $59 million from the Texas settlement.

Kickbacks to Nursing Home Pharmacies

The civil settlement also resolves allegations that, in furtherance of their efforts to target elderly dementia patients in nursing homes, J&J and Janssen paid kickbacks to Omnicare Inc., the nation’s largest pharmacy specializing in dispensing drugs to nursing home patients.  In a complaint filed in the District of Massachusetts in January 2010, the United States alleged that J&J paid millions of dollars in kickbacks to Omnicare under the guise of market share rebate payments, data-purchase agreements, “grants” and “educational funding.”  These kickbacks were intended to induce Omnicare and its hundreds of consultant pharmacists to engage in “active intervention programs” to promote the use of Risperdal and other J&J drugs in nursing homes.  Omnicare’s consultant pharmacists regularly reviewed nursing home patients’ medical charts and made recommendations to physicians on what drugs should be prescribed for those patients.  Although consultant pharmacists purported to provide “independent” recommendations based on their clinical judgment, J&J viewed the pharmacists as an “extension of [J&J’s] sales force.”

J&J and Janssen have agreed to pay $149 million to resolve the government’s contention that these kickbacks caused Omnicare to submit false claims to federal health care programs.  The federal share of this settlement is $132 million, and the five participating states’ total share is $17 million.  In 2009, Omnicare paid $98 million to resolve its civil liability for claims that it accepted kickbacks from J&J and Janssen, along with certain other conduct.

“Consultant pharmacists can play an important role in protecting nursing home residents from the use of antipsychotic drugs as chemical restraints,” said U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts Carmen Ortiz.  “This settlement is a reminder that the recommendations of consultant pharmacists should be based on their independent clinical judgment and should not be the product of money paid by drug companies.”

Off-Label Promotion of the Heart Failure Drug Natrecor

The civil settlement announced today also resolves allegations that J&J and another of its subsidiaries, Scios Inc., caused false and fraudulent claims to be submitted to federal health care programs for the heart failure drug Natrecor.  In August 2001, the FDA approved Natrecor to treat patients with acutely decompensated congestive heart failure who have shortness of breath at rest or with minimal activity.  This approval was based on a study involving hospitalized patients experiencing severe heart failure who received infusions of Natrecor over an average 36-hour period.

In a civil complaint filed in 2009 in the Northern District of California, the government alleged that, shortly after Natrecor was approved, Scios launched an aggressive campaign to market the drug for scheduled, serial outpatient infusions for patients with less severe heart failure – a use not included in the FDA-approved label and not covered by federal health care programs.  These infusions generally involved visits to an outpatient clinic or doctor’s office for four- to six-hour infusions one or two times per week for several weeks or months.

The government’s complaint alleged that Scios had no sound scientific evidence supporting the medical necessity of these outpatient infusions and misleadingly used a small pilot study to encourage the serial outpatient use of the drug.  Among other things, Scios sponsored an extensive speaker program through which doctors were paid to tout the purported benefits of serial outpatient use of Natrecor.  Scios also urged doctors and hospitals to set up outpatient clinics specifically to administer the serial outpatient infusions, in some cases providing funds to defray the costs of setting up the clinics, and supplied providers with extensive resources and support for billing Medicare for the outpatient infusions.

As part of today’s resolution, J&J and Scios have agreed to pay the federal government $184 million to resolve their civil liability for the alleged false claims to federal health care programs resulting from their off-label marketing of Natrecor.  In October 2011, Scios pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor FDCA violation and paid a criminal fine of $85 million for introducing Natrecor into interstate commerce for an off-label use.

“This case is an example of a drug company encouraging doctors to use a drug in a way that was unsupported by valid scientific evidence,” said First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California Brian Stretch.  “We are committed to ensuring that federal health care programs do not pay for such inappropriate uses, and that pharmaceutical companies market their drugs only for uses that have been proven safe and effective.”

Non-Monetary Provisions of the Global Resolution and Corporate Integrity Agreement

In addition to the criminal and civil resolutions, J&J has executed a five-year Corporate Integrity Agreement (CIA) with the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG).  The CIA includes provisions requiring J&J to implement major changes to the way its pharmaceutical affiliates do business.  Among other things, the CIA requires J&J to change its executive compensation program to permit the company to recoup annual bonuses and other long-term incentives from covered executives if they, or their subordinates, engage in significant misconduct.  J&J may recoup monies from executives who are current employees and from those who have left the company.  The CIA also requires J&J’s pharmaceutical businesses to implement and maintain transparency regarding their research practices, publication policies and payments to physicians.  On an annual basis, management employees, including senior executives and certain members of J&J’s independent board of directors, must certify compliance with provisions of the CIA.  J&J must submit detailed annual reports to HHS-OIG about its compliance program and its business operations.

“OIG will work aggressively with our law enforcement partners to hold companies accountable for marketing and promotion that violate laws intended to protect the public,” said Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Daniel R. Levinson.  “Our compliance agreement with Johnson & Johnson increases individual accountability for board members, sales representatives, company executives and management.  The agreement also contains strong monitoring and reporting provisions to help ensure that the public is protected from future unlawful and potentially harmful off-label marketing.”

Coordinated Investigative Effort Spans Federal and State Law Enforcement

This resolution marks the culmination of an extensive, coordinated investigation by federal and state law enforcement partners that is the hallmark of the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) initiative, which fosters government collaborations to fight fraud.  Announced in May 2009 by Attorney General Eric Holder and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, the HEAT initiative has focused efforts to reduce and prevent Medicare and Medicaid financial fraud through enhanced cooperation.

The criminal cases against Janssen and Scios were handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the Northern District of California and the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch.  The civil settlements were handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the Northern District of California and the District of Massachusetts and the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch.  Assistance was provided by the HHS Office of Counsel to the Inspector General, Office of the General Counsel-CMS Division, the FDA’s Office of Chief Counsel and the National Association of Medicaid Fraud Control Units.

This matter was investigated by HHS-OIG, the Department of Defense’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service, the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations, the Office of Personnel Management’s Office of Inspector General, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Labor, TRICARE Program Integrity, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service’s Office of the Inspector General and the FBI.

One of the most powerful tools in the fight against Medicare and Medicaid financial fraud is the False Claims Act.  Since January 2009, the Justice Department has recovered a total of more than $16.7 billion through False Claims Act cases, with more than $11.9 billion of that amount recovered in cases involving fraud against federal health care programs.

The department enforces the FDCA by prosecuting those who illegally distribute unapproved, misbranded and adulterated drugs and medical devices in violation of the Act.  Since 2009, fines, penalties and forfeitures that have been imposed in connection with such FDCA violations have totaled more than $6 billion.

The civil settlements described above resolve multiple lawsuits filed under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act, which allow private citizens to bring civil actions on behalf of the government and to share in any recovery.  From the federal government’s share of the civil settlements announced today, the whistleblowers in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania will receive $112 million, the whistleblowers in the District of Massachusetts will receive $27.7 million and the whistleblower in the Northern District of California will receive $28 million.  Except to the extent that J&J subsidiaries have pleaded guilty or agreed to plead guilty to the criminal charges discussed above, the claims settled by the civil settlements are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability. Court documents related to today’s settlement can be viewed online at www.justice.gov/opa/jj-pc-docs.html.

US Government Intervenes in False Claims Lawsuit Against United States Investigations Services for Failing to Perform Required Quality Reviews of Background Investigations

The government has intervened in a lawsuit filed under the False Claims Act against United States Investigations Services LLC (USIS) in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, the Department of Justice announced today.  The lawsuit alleges that USIS, located in Falls Church, Va., failed to perform quality control reviews in connection with its background investigations for the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM).

The lawsuit was filed by a former employee of USIS, Blake Percival, under the qui tam or whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act, which permit private parties, known as relators, to sue on behalf of the government when they believe false claims for government funds have been submitted.  The private party is entitled to receive a share of any funds recovered through the lawsuit.  The False Claims Act also permits the government to investigate the allegations made in the relator’s complaint and to decide whether to intervene in the lawsuit, and to recover three times its damages plus civil penalties.  The government is intervening now based on the results of its investigation of the relator’s allegations and has requested that the court give it until Jan. 22, 2014, to file its own complaint.

“We will not tolerate shortcuts taken by companies that we have entrusted with vetting individuals to be given access to our country’s sensitive and secret information,”  said Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Division.  “The Justice Department will take action against those who charge the taxpayers for services they failed to provide, especially when their non-performance could place our country’s security at risk.”

Since 1996, USIS has contracted with OPM to perform background investigations on individuals seeking employment with various federal agencies.  Executed in 2006, the contract at issue in the lawsuit required USIS to conduct the investigatory fieldwork on each prospective applicant.  It also required that a trained USIS Reviewer perform a full review of each background investigation to ensure it conformed to OPM standards before sending the file back to OPM for processing.

According to the relator’s complaint, starting in 2008, USIS engaged in a  practice known at USIS as “dumping.”  Specifically, USIS used a proprietary computer software program to automatically release to OPM background investigations that had not gone through the full review process and thus were not complete.  USIS allegedly would dump cases to meet revenue targets and maximize its profits.  The lawsuit alleges that USIS concealed this practice from OPM and improperly  billed OPM for background investigations it knew were not performed in accordance with the contract.

“Thorough, appropriate and accurate background checks are essential in the employment of government personnel,” said George L. Beck Jr., U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama.  “The increase in foreign and domestic terrorism places an increased responsibility on our government to ensure that unsuitable individuals are prohibited from government employment.”

“This is a clarion call for accountability,” said Patrick E. McFarland, Inspector General of OPM.    “As recent events have shown, it is vital for the safety and security of Americans to have these background investigations performed in a thorough and accurate manner.  We can accept no less.  Those responsible for any malfeasance that compromises the integrity of the background investigations process must be held accountable.”

“OPM does not tolerate fraud or falsification,” said Elaine Kaplan, Acting Director of OPM.  “We work hard to prevent and detect both through a variety of means including a robust integrity assurance program, multiple levels of review and workforce education and training.  We also work hand in hand with our Inspector General and the Department of Justice when we discover fraud so that bad actors are held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.”

This matter was handled by the Commercial Litigation Branch of the Justice Department’s Civil Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Alabama in conjunction with OPM’s Office of Inspector General and Federal Investigative Service.

The claims asserted against USIS are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

13-1158

Former USAID Senior Official Conflict of Interest

David Ostermeyer, who retired from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) in 2012, will pay the government a $30,000 penalty to settle allegations that he participated in a matter in which he had a financial interest that conflicted with his duties when he was Chief Financial Officer of the agency, the Justice Department announced today.

We expect government officials to earn and maintain the trust of taxpayers by acting with the This requires, at a minimum, that they do their work free of prohibited conflicts of interest. The ” The government alleged that shortly before Ostermeyer retired from USAID, he helped the a position that Ostermeyer intended to apply for after he retired. In an effort to ensure he would be awarded the position, Ostermeyer allegedly tailored the solicitation to his specific skills and experiences.  Federal conflict of interest laws prohibit executive branch employees from participating personally and substantially in matters in which they have a financial interest. Since Ostermeyer had a financial interest in the contract solicitation, the government alleged that he could not participate in drafting it and, therefore, violated 18 U.S.C. § 208(a).
“To maintain public trust in our institutions, it is vital that those in government adhere to the highest standards of integrity,” said Michael Carroll, Acting Inspector General for USAID. “The exceptional work of the investigators and attorneys on this case reflects our resolve to uphold these standards.”  This settlement was the result of a coordinated effort by the Justice Department’s Civil Division and USAID’s Office of Inspector General. The claims resolved by this settlement are allegations only; there has been no determination of liability.

MainJustice.Com: “Former Civil Division Fraud Leader Joins White Collar Firm”

MainJustice.Com: “Former Civil Division Fraud Leader Joins White Collar Firm”

Patricia Davis, former Assistant Director, Fraud Section, Civil Division, joins GeyerGorey LLP

Sweet Lime Portrait Design, Family Photography, Baby Photography, Maternity Photography
Patricia Davis, a twenty-year veteran of the Department of Justice, has joined GeyerGorey LLP as of counsel.  She previously served as Assistant Director, Fraud Section, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, where she was responsible for investigating and prosecuting hundreds of cases involving fraud on government healthcare, procurement and grant/loan programs.  Prior to joining the Department, Ms. Davis was Deputy Counsel to the Inspector General at the General Services Administration.  She is the eleventh former DOJ prosecutor to join the boutique law firm in less than a year.

(See the firm’s Representative Matters by clicking here [this is not a comprehensive list and does not yet incorporate any of Ms. Davis’s experience])

 “The scope and breadth of Pat’s experience is unparalleled.  Much of the Civil Division’s enforcement program focusing on Defense Department contracts and pharmaceuticals rested squarely on her shoulders,” said Brad Geyer, one of the firm’s founding partners.  “We are delighted that Pat has decided to join us.”

Robert Zastrow, who was Verizon’s Assistant General Counsel for 15 years before co-founding the firm in October 2012, added,“ Pat Davis is an excellent addition to our corporate compliance and white collar practice.”

 “I believe that Pat brings our firm to a new level in terms of our ability to get cases placed appropriately and to enhance the chances that our qui tam (False Claims Act) cases will be adopted by the government,” said Hays Gorey, a firm co-founder.  “With Pat’s terrific background and deep legal knowledge, we are uniquely positioned to develop cases so that they are ready, when filed, to be transitioned immediately to the appropriate U.S. Attorney’s Office or the Civil Division of the Department of Justice.”

Headquartered in Washington, D.C., with offices in New York, Boston, Philadelphia and Dallas, GeyerGorey LLP specializes in white collar criminal defense, particularly investigations and cases involving allegations of economic crimes, including violations of the federal antitrust laws (price fixing, bid rigging, territorial and customer allocation agreements), the procurement and grant fraud statutes, the securities laws, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the False Claims Act and other whistleblower actions.  The firm also conducts internal investigations of possible criminal conduct and provides advice regarding compliance with antitrust, anti-bribery and other laws and regulations, in addition to advising on voluntary and mandatory disclosure issues. For further information, please call Patricia Davis at (202) 559-1456 or email [email protected].

California Mobile Lab and X-ray Provider, Diagnostic Laboratories and Radiology, to Pay $17.5 Million for Falsely Billing Medicare and Medi-CAL

Kan-Di-Ki LLC, formerly known as Kan-Di-Ki Inc., doing business as Diagnostic Laboratories and Radiology (Diagnostic Labs),  will pay $17.5 million to settle allegations that the California-based company violated the federal and California False Claims Acts by paying kickbacks for referral of mobile lab and radiology services subsequently billed to Medicare and Medi-Cal (the state of California’s Medicaid program), the Justice Department announced today.

“This settlement demonstrates the Department of Justice’s continuing efforts to protect public funds,” said Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division.  “We will continue to work with our state partners to recover misspent monies from companies that abuse government health care programs.”

Diagnostic Labs allegedly took advantage of Medicare’s different reimbursement system for inpatient and outpatient services by  charging Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs) in California discounted rates for inpatient services paid by Medicare in exchange for the facilities’ referral of outpatient business to Diagnostic Labs.  For inpatient services, Medicare pays a fixed rate based on the patient’s diagnosis, regardless of specific services provided.  For outpatients, Medicare pays for each service separately.  Diagnostic Labs’ scheme enabled the SNFs to maximize profit earned for providing inpatient services by decreasing SNFs’ costs of providing these services.  It also allegedly allowed Diagnostic Labs to obtain a steady stream of lucrative outpatient referrals that it could directly bill to Medicare and Medi-Cal.  The provision of inducements, including discounted rates, to generate referrals is prohibited by federal and state law.

“When medical facility owners illegally offer discounts to customers to generate business, it results in inflated claims to government health care programs and increases costs for all taxpayers,” said Glenn R. Ferry, Special Agent in Charge for the Los Angeles Region of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General.  “This $17.5 million settlement demonstrates OIG’s ongoing commitment to safeguarding federal health care programs and taxpayer dollars against all types of fraudulent activities.”

This settlement illustrates the government’s emphasis on combating health care fraud and marks another achievement for the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) initiative, which was announced in May 2009 by Attorney General Eric Holder and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.  The partnership between the two departments has focused efforts to reduce and prevent Medicare and Medicaid financial fraud through enhanced cooperation.  One of the most powerful tools in this effort is the False Claims Act.  Since January 2009, the Justice Department has recovered a total of more than $16.6 billion through False Claims Act cases, with more than $11.8 billion of that amount recovered in cases involving fraud against federal health care programs.

This settlement resolves a lawsuit filed by former Diagnostic Lab employees, Jon Pasqua and Jeff Hauser, under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the federal and state False Claims Acts.  The acts allow private citizens  with knowledge of fraud to bring civil actions on behalf of the government and to share in any recovery .  Together, Pasqua and Hauser will receive $3,755,500  as their share of the federal government’s recovery.

The investigation was jointly handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, the Justice Department’s Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch and the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Inspector General.

The qui tam case is captioned United States and State of California ex rel. Pasqua et al. v. Kan-Di-Ki LLC f/k/a Kan-Di-Ki Inc. d/b/a Diagnostic Laboratories and Radiology, Civ. Action No. 10 0965 JST (Rzx) (C.D. Cal.).   The claims resolved by this settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

MRI Diagnostic Testing Company, Imagimed LLC, and Its Former Owners and Chief Radiologist to Pay $3.57 Million to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations

New York-based Imagimed LLC, the company’s former owners, William B. Wolf III and Dr. Timothy J. Greenan, and the company’s former chief radiologist, Dr. Steven Winter, will pay $3.57 million to resolve allegations that they submitted to federal healthcare programs false claims for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) services, the Justice Department announced today.  Imagimed owns and operates fifteen MRI facilities, located primarily in New York state, under the name “Open MRI.”

 Allegedly, from July 1, 2001, through April 23, 2008, Imagimed, Greenan, Wolf and Winter submitted claims to Medicare, Medicaid and TRICARE for MRI scans performed with a contrast dye without the direct supervision of a qualified physician.  Since a potential adverse side effect of contrast dye is anaphylactic shock, federal regulations require that a physician supervise the administration of contrast dye when it is used for an MRI.  Also, allegedly, from July 1, 2005, to April 23, 2008, Imagimed, Greenan, Wolf and Winter submitted claims for services referred to Imagimed by physicians with whom Imagimed had improper financial relationships.  In exchange for these referrals, Imagimed entered into sham on-call arrangements, provided pre-authorization services without charge and provided various gifts to certain referring physicians, in violation of the Stark Law and the Anti-Kickback Statute.

“The Department of Justice is committed to guarding against abuse of federal healthcare programs,” said Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division.  “We will help protect patients’ health by ensuring doctors who submit claims to federal healthcare programs follow proper safety precautions at all times.”

U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York, Richard S. Hartunian said: “This case is an example of our commitment to using all of the remedies available, including civil actions under the False Claims Act, to ensure patient safety and combat health care fraud.  Stripping away the profit motive for circumventing physician supervision requirements has both a remedial and a deterrent effect.  The settlement announced today advances our critical interest in both the integrity of our health care system and the safe delivery of medical services.”

The allegations resolved by the settlement were brought in a lawsuit filed under the False Claims Act’s whistleblower provisions, which permit private parties to sue for false claims on behalf of the government and to share in any recovery.  The whistleblower in this case, Dr. Patrick Lynch, was a local radiologist and will receive $565,500.

This settlement illustrates the government’s emphasis on combating health care fraud and marks another achievement for the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) initiative, which was announced in May 2009 by Attorney General Eric Holder and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.  The partnership between the two departments has focused efforts to reduce and prevent Medicare and Medicaid financial fraud through enhanced cooperation.  One of the most powerful tools in this effort is the False Claims Act.  Since January 2009, the Justice Department has recovered a total of more than $14.8 billion through False Claims Act cases, with more than $10.8 billion of that amount recovered in cases involving fraud against federal health care programs.

The investigation and settlement were the result of a coordinated effort among the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York; the Justice Department’s Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch and the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General.

The case is United States of America ex rel. Lynch v. Imagimed LLC, et al. (N.D. N.Y.).  The claims released by the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

Texas-Based School Chain to Pay Government $3.7 Million for Submitting False Claims for Federal Student Financial Aid Schools Located in Texas, Florida, New Mexico and Oklahoma

ATI Enterprises Inc. will pay the government $3.7 million to resolve False Claims Act allegations that it falsely certified compliance with federal student aid programs’ eligibility requirements and submitted claims for ineligible students, the Justice Department announced today.

“Federal financial aid is meant to help students obtain a quality education from an eligible institution, and the Department of Justice is committed to ensuring colleges comply with the rules to make certain that happens,” said Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division.

Allegedly, ATI Enterprises knowingly misrepresented to the Texas Workforce Commission and to the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges its job placement statistics to maintain its state licensure and accreditation. To participate in federal student aid programs, as authorized by Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (Title IV), schools must enter into a contract with the Secretary of Education called a Program Participation Agreement, in which they agree to a number of terms. For example, if an institution advertises its job placement rates as a means of attracting students to enroll, it must make available to prospective students its most recent and accurate employment statistics to substantiate the truthfulness of its advertisements. The government alleged that, by misrepresenting its job placement statistics, ATI Enterprises fraudulently maintained its eligibility for federal financial aid under Title IV.

The government further alleged that ATI employees engaged in fraudulent practices to induce students to enroll and maintain their enrollment in the schools. This falsely increased the schools’ enrollment numbers, and consequently, the amount of federal dollars they received at the expense of taxpayers and students, who incurred long-term debt.

“Misuses of the federal student aid system must not be tolerated, for the sake of the taxpayers and of the innocent individuals who are seeking a quality education,” said Sarah R. Saldaña, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, where some of the ATI campuses involved in the lawsuit are located.

Wifredo A. Ferrer, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida said: “Federal financial aid is there to help students attain their dreams and goals, and misuse of these funds to increase corporate profits is unacceptable. We are committed to ensuring that federal student aid is used for the benefit of students.”

The settlement amount will be paid from funds supporting three letters of credit that ATI provided to the Department of Education. In addition to the False Claims Act settlement, the Department of Education will disburse from the letter of credit funds $2 million for student loan refunds in relation to cases students filed against ATI in Texas state courts and other related arbitrations.

“Federal student aid exists so that students can make the dream of a higher education a reality. That’s why misuse in any way of these vital funds cannot be tolerated,” said Kathleen Tighe, Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Education. “I’m proud of the work of OIG special agents for holding ATI Enterprises accountable and for protecting the integrity of federal education dollars.”

The settlement resolves allegations made in two separate complaints against ATI Enterprises Inc., and related entities filed under the False Claims Act’s qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions, which permit a private individual to file suit for false claims to the government and to share in any recovery. The first complaint, U.S. ex rel. Aldridge, et al. v. ATI Enterprises Inc., et al., was filed in July 2009 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The second complaint, U.S. ex rel. Ramirez-Damon v. ATI Enterprises Inc., was filed in July 2011 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

This matter was investigated by the Commercial Litigation Branch of the Justice Department’s Civil Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, and the Department of Education’s Office of Inspector General and Office of General Counsel. The claims settled by this agreement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

United States Files Lawsuit Against PharMerica Corporation for Violations of the False Claims Act and the Controlled Substances Act Government Alleges That Long-term Care Pharmacy Billed Medicare for Schedule II Controlled Substances That Were Dispensed Without a Valid Prescription

The United States has filed suit against PharMerica Corp. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, the Justice Department announced today.   The lawsuit alleges that PharMerica violated the False Claims Act and the Controlled Substances Act by dispensing controlled drugs without valid prescriptions and causing claims for illegally dispensed drugs to be submitted to the Medicare program.

 

PharMerica is a long-term care pharmacy that dispenses drugs to residents of long-term care facilities, including nursing homes and skilled nursing facilities. PharMerica services approximately 300,000 residents of long-term care facilities and fills approximately 40 million prescriptions annually.   Many of the prescriptions filled by PharMerica are for controlled substances listed in Schedule II under the Controlled Substances Act.   Schedule II drugs, such as oxycodone and fentanyl, can cause significant harm if used improperly and have a high potential for abuse.

 

“Pharmacies are prohibited by law from dispensing Schedule II narcotics, which have the highest potential for abuse of any prescription drug, without a valid prescription from a physician,” said Stuart Delery, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice.  “As we have done today, the Department of Justice will take action to protect the integrity of Federal health care program funds and hold those who violate the law accountable.”

 

The government’s complaint alleges that PharMerica routinely dispensed Schedule II controlled drugs in non-emergency situations without first obtaining a written prescription from a treating physician.  According to the complaint, PharMerica’s actions violated both the spirit and the letter of the Controlled Substances Act by enabling nursing home staff to order narcotics, and pharmacists to dispense narcotics, before confirming that a physician had made a medical judgment about whether these narcotics were necessary and should be used by the resident.   The complaint alleges that PharMerica knowingly caused the submission of false claims to Medicare for these improperly dispensed Schedule II drugs, in violation of the False Claims Act.

 

The lawsuit was initiated by former PharMerica employee Jennifer Denk who filed a complaint against PharMerica in July 2009.   The complaint was filed under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act, which permit parties, known as “relators,” to sue on behalf of the United States when they believe that defendants submitted false claims for government funds.   Under the False Claims Act, the government may intervene in the suit and recover three times its damages plus civil penalties.   Denk’s complaint was later consolidated with a subsequent complaint filed in May 2010 by Eric Beeders and Lesa Martino.

 

“ The complaint that we are filing today reflects the abiding commitment of the Justice Department to the qui tam process, encouraging people with information about alleged fraud and abuse to report it in a timely and effective manner,” said James L. Santelle, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.  “The False Claims Act allegations in this case, which involve Medicare billings for the dispensing of Schedule II controlled substances absent valid prescriptions, are precisely the type of allegations that our office and the Civil Division examine carefully, investigate fully, and prosecute vigorously—to protect taxpayer monies and to promote the delivery of professional health care to all of our constituents.”

 

The investigation was conducted by the Justice Department’s Civil Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services.
“When the most restrictive class of pharmaceutical controlled substances are dispensed by a pharmacy it is crucial to patient safety, as well as mandatory by federal law, to ensure that the patient’s physician prescribed and intended for the drug to be administered. As alleged in this complaint, PharMerica did not perform that standard of patient care by failing to obtain a valid prescription prior to dispensing and is now being held accountable,” stated Jack Riley, Special Agent in Charge of the DEA’s Chicago Field Division.

 

The government’s involvement in this case is part of the United States’ emphasis on combating health care fraud and another step for the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) initiative, which was announced by Attorney General Eric Holder and Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services in 2009.   The partnership between the two departments has focused efforts to reduce and prevent Medicare and Medicaid financial fraud through enhanced cooperation.   One of the most powerful tools in this effort is the False Claims Act.   Since January 2009, the Justice Department has recovered a total of more than $14.8 billion through False Claims Act cases, with more than $10.8 billion of that amount recovered in cases involving fraud against federal health care programs.

 

The lawsuit is captioned U.S. ex rel. Denk v. PharMerica Corporation, Case No. 09-cv-720.   The claims asserted in the complaint against PharMerica are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.