Category Archives: Important Legal Filings

Kentucky Businessman Sentenced in New York Federal Court for $53 Million Tax Scheme and Massive Fraud that Involved Bribery of Bank Officials

Posted on by

Acting Assistant Attorney General Caroline D. Ciraolo of the Department of Justice’s Tax Division and U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara of the Southern District of New York announced that a Kentucky businessman was sentenced today to serve 12 years in prison.

Wilbur Anthony Huff, 53, of Caneyville and Louisville, Kentucky, was also ordered to pay more than $108 million in restitution for committing various tax crimes that caused more than $50 million in losses to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and a massive fraud that involved the bribery of bank officials, the fraudulent purchase of an insurance company, and the defrauding of insurance regulators and an investment bank.  In December 2014, Huff pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Noemi Reice Buchwald of the Southern District of New York, who imposed today’s sentence.

“The department is committed to vigorously pursuing and prosecuting those individuals who violate the employment tax laws of the United States,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Ciraolo.  “Today’s significant prison sentence sends a loud and clear message to those engaged in such criminal conduct, including owners and operators of professional employer organizations like Mr. Huff, who steal employment taxes collected from their business clients to line their own pockets, instead of paying over those funds to the IRS.”

“Anthony Huff and his co-conspirators stole millions of dollars from taxpayers and engaged in extensive frauds, all in the pursuit of additional property, luxury cars and the like,” said U.S. Attorney Bharara.  “His crimes have earned him 12 years in prison.  I would like to thank our law enforcement partners for their assistance on this case.”

According to the information, plea agreement, sentencing submissions and statements made during court proceedings:

Huff was a businessman who controlled numerous entities located throughout the United States (Huff-Controlled Entities).  Huff controlled the companies and their finances, using them to orchestrate a $53 million fraud on the IRS and other schemes that spanned four states, involving tax violations, bank bribery, fraud on bank regulators and the fraudulent purchase of an insurance company.  As part of his crimes, Huff concealed his control of the Huff-Controlled Entities by installing other individuals to oversee the companies’ day-to-day functions and to serve as the companies’ titular owners, directors, or officers.  Huff also maintained a corrupt relationship with Park Avenue Bank and Charles J. Antonucci Sr., the bank’s president and chief executive officer, and Matthew L. Morris, the bank’s senior vice president.

Tax Crimes

From 2008 to 2010, HUFF controlled O2HR, a professional employer organization (PEO) located in Tampa, Florida.  Like other PEOs, O2HR was paid to manage the payroll, tax and workers’ compensation insurance obligations of its client companies.  However, instead of paying $53 million in taxes that O2HR’s clients owed the IRS and $5 million to Providence Property and Casualty Insurance Company (Providence P&C) – an insurance company based in Oklahoma – for workers’ compensation coverage expenses for O2HR clients, Huff stole the money that his client companies had paid O2HR for those purposes.  Among other things, Huff diverted millions of dollars from O2HR to fund his investments in unrelated business ventures and pay his family members’ personal expenses.  The expenses included mortgages on Huff’s homes, rent payments for his children’s apartments, staff and equipment for Huff’s farm, designer clothing, jewelry and luxury cars.

Conspiracy to Commit Bank Bribery, Defraud Bank Regulators and Fraudulently Purchase an Oklahoma Insurance Company

From 2007 through 2010, Huff engaged in a massive multi-faceted conspiracy in which he schemed to bribe executives of Park Avenue Bank, defraud bank regulators and the board and shareholders of a publicly-traded company, and fraudulently purchase an Oklahoma insurance company.  As described in more detail below, Huff paid bribes totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash and other items to Morris and Antonucci in exchange for their favorable treatment at Park Avenue Bank.

As part of the corrupt relationship between Huff and the bank executives, Huff, Morris, Antonucci and others conspired to defraud various entities and regulators during the relevant time period.  Specifically, Huff conspired with Morris and Antonucci to falsely bolster Park Avenue Bank’s capital by orchestrating a series of fraudulent transactions to make it appear that Park Avenue Bank had received an outside infusion of $6.5 million, and engaged in a series of further fraudulent actions to conceal from bank regulators the true source of the funds.

Huff further conspired with Morris, Antonucci and others to defraud Oklahoma insurance regulators and others by making material misrepresentations and omissions regarding the source of $37.5 million used to purchase Providence Property and Casualty Insurance Company, an insurance company based in Oklahoma that provided workers’ compensation insurance for O2HR’s clients and to whom O2HR owed a significant debt.

Bribery of Park Avenue Bank Executives

From 2007 to 2009, Huff paid Morris and Antonucci at least $400,000 in exchange for which they: provided Huff with fraudulent letters of credit obligating Park Avenue Bank to pay $1.75 million to an investor in one of Huff’s businesses if Huff failed to pay the investor back himself; allowed the Huff-Controlled Entities to accrue $9 million in overdrafts; facilitated intra-bank transfers in furtherance of Huff’s fraud; and fraudulently caused Park Avenue Bank to issue at least $4.5 million in loans to the Huff-Controlled Entities.

Fraud on Bank Regulators and a Publicly-Traded Company

From 2008 to 2009, Huff, Morris and Antonucci engaged in a scheme to prevent Park Avenue Bank from being designated as “undercapitalized” by regulators – a designation that would prohibit the bank from engaging in certain types of banking transactions and that would subject the bank to a range of potential enforcement actions by regulators.  Specifically, they engaged in a series of deceptive, “round-trip” financial transactions to make it appear that Antonucci had infused the bank with $6.5 million in new capital when, in actuality, the $6.5 million was part of the bank’s pre-existing capital.  Huff, Morris and Antonucci funneled the $6.5 million from the bank through accounts controlled by Huff to Antonucci.  This was done to make it appear as though Antonucci was helping to stabilize the bank’s capitalization problem, so that the bank could continue engaging in certain banking transactions that it would otherwise have been prohibited from doing, and to put the bank in a better posture to receive $11 million from the Troubled Asset Relief Program.  To conceal their unlawful financial maneuvering, Huff created, or directed the creation of, documents falsely suggesting that Antonucci had earned the $6.5 million through a bogus transaction involving another company Antonucci owned.  Huff, Morris and Antonucci further concealed their scheme by stealing $2.3 million from General Employment Enterprises Inc., a publicly-traded temporary staffing company, in order to pay Park Avenue Bank back for monies used in connection with the $6.5 million transaction.

Fraud on Insurance Regulators and the Investment Firm

From July 2008 to November 2009, Huff, Morris, Antonucci and Allen Reichman, an executive at an investment bank and financial services company headquartered in New York City (the Investment Firm), conspired to defraud Oklahoma insurance regulators into allowing Antonucci to purchase the assets of Providence P&C and defraud the Investment Firm into providing a $30 million loan to finance the purchase.  Specifically, Huff and Antonucci devised a scheme in which Antonucci would purchase Providence P&C’s assets by obtaining a $30 million loan from the Investment Firm, which used Providence P&C’s own assets as collateral for the loan.  However, because Oklahoma insurance regulators had to approve any sale of Providence P&C, and because Oklahoma law forbade the use of Providence P&C’s assets as collateral for such a loan, Huff, Morris, Antonucci and Reichman made and conspired to make a number of material misstatements and material omissions to the Investment Firm and Oklahoma insurance regulators concerning the true nature of the financing for Antonucci’s purchase of Providence P&C.  Among other things, Reichman directed Antonucci to sign a letter that provided false information regarding the collateral that would be used for the loan, and Huff, Morris and Antonucci conspired to falsely represent to Oklahoma insurance regulators that Park Avenue Bank – not the Investment Firm – was funding the purchase of Providence P&C.

After deceiving Oklahoma regulators into approving the sale of Providence P&C, Huff took $4 million of the company’s assets, which he used to continue the scheme to defraud O2HR’s clients.  Ultimately, in November 2009, the insurance company became insolvent and was placed in receivership after Huff, Morris and Antonucci had pilfered its remaining assets.

*                *                *

In addition to his prison sentence, Huff was sentenced to three years of supervised release, and ordered to forfeit $10.8 million to the United States and pay a total of more than $108 million in restitution to victims of his crimes, including, among others, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the IRS.

In imposing today’s sentence, Judge Buchwald said Huff’s crimes were “truly staggering” and “eye popping.”  Judge Buchwald described Huff’s conduct, which was preceded by a federal conviction and failure to pay millions in civil judgments, as “a living example” of “chutzpah,” which she defined as “shameless audacity and unmitigated gall.”

Morris and Reichman pleaded guilty for their roles in the above-described offenses on Oct. 17, 2013, and Feb. 20, 2015, respectively.  Reichman is scheduled to be sentenced before Judge Buchwald on July 15, and Morris is scheduled to be sentenced before Judge Buchwald on Aug. 19.

Antonucci pleaded guilty to his role in the crimes described above on Oct. 8, 2010, and is scheduled to be sentenced on Aug. 20, also before Judge Buchwald.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Ciraolo and U.S. Attorney Bharara thanked the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the FBI, IRS-Criminal Investigation, the New York State Department of Financial Services, Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations, and the Office of Inspector General of the FDIC, for their work in the investigation, and the Tax Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Southern District of Florida, for their assistance in the prosecution.

Today’s announcement is part of efforts underway by the President’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force.  The task force was established to wage an aggressive, coordinated and proactive effort to investigate and prosecute financial crimes.  With more than 20 federal agencies, 94 U.S. attorneys’ offices, and state and local partners, it’s the broadest coalition of law enforcement, investigatory and regulatory agencies ever assembled to combat fraud.  Since its formation, the task force has made great strides in facilitating increased investigation and prosecution of financial crimes; enhancing coordination and cooperation among federal, state and local authorities; addressing discrimination in the lending and financial markets; and conducting outreach to the public, victims, financial institutions and other organizations.  Since fiscal year 2009, the Justice Department has filed over 18,000 financial fraud cases against more than 25,000 defendants.  For more information on the task force, please visit www.StopFraud.gov.

The case is being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Southern District of New York Complex Frauds and Cybercrime Unit.  Assistant U.S. Attorneys Janis Echenberg and Daniel Tehrani and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Tino Lisella of the Tax Division are in charge of the criminal case.

Additional information about the Tax Division and its enforcement efforts may be found on the division’s website.

Four People Arrested and Charged in Cross-Country Insider Trading Scheme

Posted on by

The owner and operator of a stock trading operation and three of his associates were arrested today on charges arising from their alleged participation in a multi-year insider trading scheme that netted more than $3.2 million in illicit profits, announced today by U.S. Attorney Paul J. Fishman for the District of New Jersey.

Steven Fishoff, 58, of Westlake Village, California, Ronald Chernin, 66, of Oak Park, California, Steven Costantin aka Steven Constantin, 54, of Farmingdale, New Jersey, and Paul Petrello, 53, of Boca Raton, Florida, are each charged by complaint with one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud.  Fishoff is charged with four substantive counts of securities fraud, Chernin and Petrello are each charged with two counts of securities fraud and Costantin is charged with one count of securities fraud.

The defendants were arrested by FBI agents this morning at their respective residences.  Costantin is scheduled to appear this afternoon before U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Dickson in Newark, New Jersey, federal court.  Fishoff is scheduled to appear before U.S. Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato in Riverside, California, federal court, Chernin is scheduled to appear before U.S. Magistrate Judge Carla Woehrle in Los Angeles, Californina, federal court, and Petrello is expected to appear before U.S. Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon in West Palm Beach, Florida, federal court.

“The defendants and their associates were entrusted with confidential, nonpublic information about companies and time and time again, they allegedly violated that trust by illegally trading the companies’ stock for substantial profits,” said U.S. Attorney Fishman.  “They allegedly rigged the game so they would always win, and their profits came at the expense of legitimate investors, who were not privy to this inside information.”

“Insider trading is an investigative priority of the FBI,” said Special Agent in Charge Richard M. Frankel for the FBI in Newark, New Jersey.  “The FBI is committed to stopping insider trading and will hold those who perpetrate these schemes accountable because their illegal activities undermine the integrity of the U.S. financial markets and weaken investor confidence.”

“We allege an insider trading scheme based on a short-selling business model designed to systematically profit on confidential information obtained under false pretenses,” said Senior Associate Director Sanjay Wadhwa for Enforcement in the SEC’s Regional Office in New York.  “But the defendants’ short selling proved to be short-sighted as they overlooked the fact that their trading patterns would be detected and they would be caught by law enforcement.”

According to the complaint unsealed today, Fishoff, Chernin, Costantin, Petrello and others, acting individually and through their associated trading entities, engaged in an insider trading scheme in which they netted more than $3.2 million in illicit profits over three years by executing illegal trades through trading entities that they controlled.

Fishoff is the president and sole owner of Featherwood Capital Inc. (Featherwood), a trading entity that he operates out of his home.  Featherwood maintained numerous stock trading accounts in its own name and in various additional names under which Featherwood did business (DBAs), including Gold Coast Total Return Inc. (Gold Coast), Seaside Capital Inc. (Seaside) and Data Complete Inc. (Data Complete).

Chernin, an attorney who was disbarred in California for misappropriation of client assets, is a friend and longtime business associate of Fishoff.  Corporate documents list Chernin as the president of Gold Coast and Fishoff as an officer.  Chernin is president of the trading entity Cedar Lane Enterprises Inc. (Cedar Lane) and an officer of Data Complete.

Costantin, a former pipefitter by trade, is Fishoff’s brother-in-law and a friend and business associate of Chernin.  Corporate documents list Costanstin as president of Seaside.  In brokerage account documents, Fishoff identifies himself as Seaside’s owner.  Costanstin is also the vice president and secretary of Cedar Lane.

Petrello is the president and owner of two trading entities, Brielle Properties Inc. and Oceanview Property Management LLC and a friend and longtime business associate of Fishoff.

On numerous occasions, the conspirators obtained material, nonpublic information related to publicly traded companies and traded on that information before it became public.  Between June 2010 and July 2013, Fishoff, Chernin, Costantin and a business associate referred to in the complaint as “Trader A” expressed interest in participating in at least 14 stock offerings by publicly traded companies.  Before providing these individuals with confidential information concerning the companies or the terms of the proposed sales, the investment bankers first required that Fishoff, Chernin, Costantin, Trader A and their associated trading entities, agree to be “brought over the wall,” or “wall-crossed,” standard industry terms which meant that they were required to keep the information disclosed to them confidential and could not buy or sell the stock based on the information.

Fishoff, Chernin, Costantin and Trader A agreed to these disclosure and trading restrictions and then flagrantly breached the agreements.  In instances where Fishoff was not personally wall-crossed in an offering, Chernin and Costantin tipped Fishoff telephonically or by email about the offering prior to the public announcement.  Even where Fishoff ostensibly was a party to the confidentiality agreement, through his affiliation with the wall-crossed trading entity, Fishoff himself breached the agreement by trading on the confidential information and by providing the information to Petrello so that Petrello could engage in parallel trading.  There were also instances where Chernin and Costantin violated the terms of the confidentiality agreements by trading themselves before the offering.  The conspirators traded through the accounts of the trading entities or through related accounts that they controlled.  The conspirators shared the proceeds of the insider trading scheme, with Fishoff wiring money to Chernin and Costantin for their services and Fishoff receiving compensation from Petrello for the offering-related tips that Fishoff provided to him.

The conspiracy count with which each defendant is charged carries a maximum potential penalty of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine, or twice the aggregate loss to victims or gain to the defendants.   Each of the substantive securities fraud charges carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $5 million fine.

U.S. Attorney Fishman credited special agents of the FBI, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge Frankel, for the investigation leading to today’s arrests and complaint.  He also thanked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s New York Regional Office under the direction of Andrew Calamari.  He also thanked special agents of the FBI, Los Angeles (Ventura Resident Agency and Riverside Resident Agency) and FBI, Miami (West Palm Beach Resident Agency) for their assistance.

The government is represented by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Shirley U. Emehelu of the Economic Crimes Unit of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Newark, New Jersey and Acting Chief Barbara Ward for the of the Office’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Unit.

The charges and allegations contained in the complaint are merely accusations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

This case was brought in coordination with President Barack Obama’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force.  The task force was established to wage an aggressive, coordinated and proactive effort to investigate and prosecute financial crimes.  With more than 20 federal agencies, 94 U.S. Attorneys’ offices and state and local partners, it’s the broadest coalition of law enforcement, investigatory and regulatory agencies ever assembled to combat fraud.  Since its formation, the task force has made great strides in facilitating increased investigation and prosecution of financial crimes; enhancing coordination and cooperation among federal, state and local authorities; addressing discrimination in the lending and financial markets and conducting outreach to the public, victims, financial institutions and other organizations.  Over the past three fiscal years, the Justice Department has filed nearly 10,000 financial fraud cases against nearly 15,000 defendants including more than 2,900 mortgage fraud defendants.  For more information on the task force, please visit www.stopfraud.gov

CCC’s: Some Thoughts On Compliance and Other Issues Raised by the Forex Guilty Pleas

Posted on by

by

It’s been almost two weeks since the Department of Justice announced its plea agreements in the Forex investigation. To recap the highlights, in his remarks announcing the case filings, Bill Baer Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division said (here):

Today’s guilty pleas to criminal charges represent major developments in our investigation into collusion affecting foreign exchange markets, particularly the spot market for trading U.S. dollars and euros. The antitrust guilty pleas announced today involving four major international financial institutions – Citicorp, JPMorgan Chase, The Royal Bank of Scotland and Barclays – are without precedent. In light of the seriousness of the crimes and the unjustified benefit to the bottom lines of these banks, we demanded parent-level guilty pleas, secured record fines of more than $2.5 billion and insisted upon three years of court-supervised probation.

In addition, UBS agreed to plead guilty to a violation in the Libor market. UBS had previously received non-prosecution protection in the Libor investigation, but that protection was withdrawn in light of UBS’s participation in the Forex cartel.

Since the news of the case filings first broke, I’ve had some additional thoughts on the matter.  First, I want to give a big pat on the back to my former colleague, Joe Muoio, who signed the pleadings on behalf of the Antitrust Division. Joe and I worked together for many years in the now closed Philadelphia Field office. Joe was the Assistant Chief and transferred to the New York Field office when the Philadelphia office was closed in 2013. The Forex investigation was a team effort (a large international team, no doubt) and there could not have a better team leader than Joe.   Congratulations to Joe and the rest of the team.

The Forex plea agreements have two noteworthy departures from previous pleas in the financial sector. For the first time, the Antitrust Division acknowledged giving credit to a company for implementing an effective compliance program after the start of the investigation. Little has been revealed about what made Barclay’s compliance program effective, why the Division chose to give credit in this case, and what the value of the credit given to Barclays was?  The plea agreements states only: “The parties further agree that Recommended Sentence is sufficient, but not greater than necessary to comply with the purposes set forth in 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a), 3572(a), in considering, among other factors, the substantial improvements to the defendant’s compliance and remediation program to prevent recurrence of the charged offense.”  This language, while limited, is still an important first step for the Antitrust Division to acknowledge (and thereby encourage) implementation of effective antitrust compliance programs. The Antitrust Division does not make changes in policy lightly and it is likely they will have more to say about this development in future speeches.

Another noteworthy fact about the Forex plea agreements is that the Antitrust Division required pleas from the parent company. Previously, in most situations where financial institutions have been charged in Forex and Libor, the plea has come from a foreign subsidiary to avoid the collateral consequences that would flow from a conviction of a publicly traded company. Requiring the parent to plead was a relatively small step, however, as the pleas were only entered after waivers were secured from the SEC.  The banks wanted assurances from U.S. regulators that they would not be barred from certain businesses before agreeing to plead guilty to criminal charges. (here). The defendants received the desired waivers.

Public Reaction

The historic pleas have not been without some public criticism. An example is an editorial in the New York Times titled: “Banks as Felons, Or Criminality Lite”

Besides the criminal label, however, nothing much has changed for the banks. And that means nothing much has changed for the public. There is no meaningful accountability in the plea deals and, by extension, no meaningful deterrence from future wrongdoing.”

SEC Commission, Kara M. Stein, was harsh in her dissent from the grant of waivers to the recidivist banks.

Allowing these institutions to continue business as usual, after multiple and serious regulatory and criminal violations, poses risks to investors and the American public that are being ignored. It is not sufficient to look at each waiver request in a vacuum.

And, in an article in USA Today (here), four leading antitrust commentators who are not usually found to be in agreement (Judge Douglas Ginsburg, FTC Commission Josh Wright and Albert Foer and Professor Robert H. Lande of the American Antitrust Institute) called for harsher penalties against individuals convicted of antitrust offenses.

Some thoughts on Compliance

As already noted, the Antitrust Division took a big step forward in encouraging the implementation of effective compliance programs. Hopefully, more details will be forthcoming about why now? What was it about Barclays’ program that was considered effective? And what was the monetary benefit for the compliance program.

The Division’s encouragement of an effective compliance program should be bolstered by the sheer magnitude of the fines and other consequences of these guilty pleas. In the compliance world, FCPA is “Top Dog” in terms of compliance resources and attention. No doubt issues like vetting third-party vendors worldwide rightfully account for this attention. But the consequences of an antitrust offense call out for an equally keen focus on antitrust compliance. I’ve written about this before (here), but the combination of huge fines, jails sentences for individuals, investigation by multiple U.S. agencies, and competition agencies around the world, and the significant damages paid out in civil class action lawsuits make a compelling case for robust antitrust compliance efforts.

Indeed, the Antitrust Division’s plea agreements with the other banks besides Barclays call for devoting resources to compliance programs:

“The defendant shall implement and shall continue to implement a compliance program designed to prevent and detect the conduct set forth in Paragraph 4 (g)-(i) above and, absent appropriate disclosure, the conduct in Paragraph 13 below throughout its operations including those of its affiliates and subsidiaries and provide an annual report to the probation officer and the United States on its progress in implementing the program, commencing on a schedule agreed to by the parties.”

The plea agreements, however, do not call for external compliance monitors. Given that the cartel involved billions of dollars, the brazen nature of the crime (the conspirators referred to themselves in private chat rooms as the “Cartel Club” and “The Mafia,” and finally, the degree of recidivism, one wonders (OK, I wonder) why no external compliance monitors? The Division sought (and received from the court) external compliance monitors in the Apple case, (a civil violation) and in AU Optronics (a first offense).  Unless the Antitrust Division provides further guidance, it appears that the only criteria for seeking an external monitor is if a company goes to trial against the Division and loses.

The Investigation Is Ongoing

There is some validity to the charge that the corporate fines are just a cost of doing business and don’t provide sufficient deterrent. Perhaps requiring a parent to plead was one step closer towards requiring a plea and no regulatory waivers. But fears of collateral damage to innocent employees (who would lose jobs), stockholders (who could be wiped out) and the economy in general make this a hard trigger to pull.  The real deterrent comes with prosecution of individuals—i.e., the guys in The Cartel or The Mafia, as they put it.   It is extremely likely that the Antitrust Division will seek charges against individuals in this case. The hard part is not so much prosecuting the traders who operated in the chat rooms and left a trail of evidence, but in determining if knowledge of the cartel went higher up in the banks. Holding the highest-level person in an organization responsible for the crime is the highest deterrence. But, this is challenging as superiors are often shielded from direct involvement in the crime and can only be convicted on the basis of the testimony of subordinates whose credibility may be compromised by their own plea. The public often cries for higher level executives to be held accountable, but juries take seriously their obligation to convict only where the proof establishes guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

There will be much more to this story so stay tuned. Thanks for reading.

Seller of “Miracle Mineral Solution” Convicted for Marketing Toxic Chemical as a Miracle Cure

Posted on by

A federal jury in the Eastern District of Washington returned a guilty verdict yesterday against a Spokane, Washington, man for selling industrial bleach as a miracle cure for numerous diseases and illnesses, including cancer, AIDS, malaria, hepatitis, lyme disease, asthma and the common cold, the Department of Justice announced.

Louis Daniel Smith, 45, was convicted following a seven-day trial of conspiracy, smuggling, selling misbranded drugs and defrauding the United States. Evidence at trial showed that Smith operated a business called “Project GreenLife” (PGL) from 2007 to 2011.  PGL sold a product called “Miracle Mineral Supplement,” or MMS, over the Internet.  MMS is a mixture of sodium chlorite and water.  Sodium chlorite is an industrial chemical used as a pesticide and for hydraulic fracking and wastewater treatment.  Sodium chlorite cannot be sold for human consumption and suppliers of the chemical include a warning sheet stating that it can cause potentially fatal side effects if swallowed.

“This verdict demonstrates that the Department of Justice will prosecute those who sell dangerous chemicals as miracle cures to sick people and their desperate loved ones,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer of the Justice Department’s Civil Division.  “Consumers have the right to expect that the medicines that they purchase are safe and effective.”  Mizer thanked the jury for its service and its careful consideration of the evidence.

The government presented evidence that Smith instructed consumers to combine MMS with citric acid to create chlorine dioxide, add water and drink the resulting mixture to cure numerous illnesses. Chlorine dioxide is a potent agent used to bleach textiles, among other industrial applications.  Chlorine dioxide is a severe respiratory and eye irritant that can cause nausea, diarrhea and dehydration.  According to the instructions for use that Smith provided with his product, nausea, diarrhea and vomiting were all signs that the miracle cure was working.  The instructions also stated that despite a risk of possible brain damage, the product might still be appropriate for pregnant women or infants who were seriously ill.

According to the evidence presented at trial, Smith created phony “water purification” and “wastewater treatment” businesses in order to obtain sodium chlorite and ship his MMS without being detected by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or U.S. Customs and Border Protection.  The government also presented evidence that Smith hid evidence from FDA inspectors and destroyed evidence while law enforcement agents were executing search warrants on his residence and business.

Before trial, three of Smith’s alleged co-conspirators, Chris Olson, Tammy Olson and Karis DeLong, Smith’s wife, pleaded guilty to introducing misbranded drugs into interstate commerce.  Chris Olson, along with alleged co-conspirators Matthew Darjanny and Joseph Lachnit, testified at trial that Smith was the leader of PGL.

In all, the jury convicted Smith of one count of conspiracy to commit multiple crimes, three counts of introducing misbranded drugs into interstate commerce with intent to defraud or mislead and one count of fraudulently smuggling merchandise into the United States.  The jury found Smith not guilty on one out of four of the misbranded drug counts. He faces a statutory maximum of 34 years in prison at his Sept. 9 sentencing.

The case was investigated by agents of the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service.  The case was prosecuted by Christopher E. Parisi and Timothy T. Finley of the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branchin Washington, D.C.

3C’s: Thomas Farmer Acquitted in Puerto Rico Shipping Price Fixing Trial

Posted on by

by Leave a Comment

After a three-week trial, Thomas Farmer, a former Crowley Liner Services Vice-President was acquitted of price-fixing and bid rigging charges by a jury in Puerto Rico. The trial was before Federal District Court Judge Daniel Dominguez. The jury was composed of six men and six women. They deliberated for three hours before returning their verdict. Framer had been indicted on March 21, 2013 on a charge of conspiracy to fix and rig Puerto Rico freight surcharges with counterparts from Horizon Lines and Sea Star Line in the U.S. mainland-Puerto Rico trade.

The acquittal marks the end of the Antitrust Division’s otherwise successful investigation into price-fixing on ocean shipping route between Puerto Rico and the United States. Farmer was the second executive to go to trial. Frank Peake, the former President of Sea Star, was convicted in 2013 on a similar charge (here). Peake’s case was noteworthy in that he was sentenced to five years in prison, a record sentence for a Sherman Act conviction (here). The Peake trial came after subordinates of his and co-conspirators from other companies had pled guilty and cooperated with the government. Peak’s direct subordinate at Sea Star, Peter Baci, was sentenced to 48 months in prison and fined $20,000. Peake’s counterpart at Horizon, Gabriel Serra, was sentenced to 34 months in prison. Other executives at Sea Star and Horizon had pled guilty, and received prison terms ranging from seven months to 29 months. Three companies have paid more than $46 million in fines for their involvement in a conspiracy that included setting rates, bid rigging and other practices.

Farmer faced a maximum sentence of ten years in prison. Farmer was represented by Joseph C. Laws, Melanie Matos Gilroy Cardona and Terrance Reed.  Farmer was facing a maximum of ten years in prison if convicted and his legal team deserves great credit for the best outcome Farmer could have hoped for.  But, there are great difficulties that the Antitrust Division faces in a “last man standing trial.”  I am not familiar with the specifics of the Farmer trial but some of these inherent difficulties are:

  • Staleness:  Farmer was indicted in March 2013.  The indictment charged a conspiracy: “From at least as early as mid-2005, to in or about April 2008.”  So, Farmer was indicted just before the five-year statute of limitations expired.  His trial did not begin until more than two years after indictment.  Farmer was tried in 2015 for conduct that ended in early 2008.  Antitrust violations do not “shock the conscience” the way a crime of violence might, and the long delay between conduct and trial can diminish whatever “jury appeal” a price-fixing case might have had.
  • Witness Fatigue:  When a witness signs a cooperation agreement with the Antitrust Division, he usually doesn’t realize that his cooperation may last longer than many marriages.  It can be difficult to work with a witness who has long since (hoped) he had put this chapter of his life behind him.  Witness prep so many years after the alleged conduct occured can involve an increasing frequency of “I’m not sure.  That was a really long time ago.”  And, in this case it was.
  • Prior Statements:  As I said, I have not read the record in the Farmer case so I do not know who the witnesses were.  But, there is a good chance some of the witnesses previously testified in the Peake trial.  So besides witness fatigue and faded recollections, defense attorneys have prior statements to work with on cross-examination.
  • The Weak Cases Are The Ones That Go To Trial:  It used to be fair to say that the Antitrust Division got plea agreements from those who they had the strongest cases against, but often found itself trying weaker cases, sometimes against senior managers that had insulated themselves from most of the illegal conduct.  But, my opinion is that today cases go to trial because the sentencing guidelines are so severe (based on volume of commerce) that the “last man standing,” who can’t get a 5K cooperation agreement/downward departure, has little to lose by going to trial.  Mr. Farmer went to trial because he declared he was innocent and a jury did in fact acquit him.  But, even a guilty party might go to trial because: (a) he has at least a chance at acquittal; (b) even if convicted at trial, he will likely be sentenced to less time than he could have negotiated with the Antitrust Division pursuant to a recommended guidelines plea agreement; and (c) in any event he can appeal and hope to get a conviction reversed on appeal.  In essence, the trial is an extended sentencing hearing, with a chance of acquittal, and even if convicted, a hope the conviction can be overturned.  I co-authored an article “A Peek Behind the Record Peake Sentence” (here) that explored some of these ideas.

Congratulations to Farmer’s defense team and also to the Antitrust Division for an otherwise very successful investigation.

Thanks for reading.

United Parcel Service Agrees to Settle Alleged Civil False Claims Act Violations

Posted on by
United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS) has agreed to pay $25 million to resolve allegations that it submitted false claims to the federal government in connection with its delivery of Next Day Air overnight packages, the Justice Department announced today.  UPS is a package delivery company based in Atlanta.

“Protecting the federal procurement process from false claims is central to the mission of the Department of Justice,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer of the Justice Department’s Civil Division.  “We will continue to ensure that when federal monies are used to purchase commercial services the government receives the prices and services to which it is entitled.”

“This conduct affected numerous federal agencies,” said U.S. Attorney Dana J. Boente of the Eastern District of Virginia.  “We place high importance on the integrity of companies that provide services to the government.  Combating all manners of fraud on the government is a high priority in the Eastern District of Virginia.”

UPS provides delivery services to hundreds of federal agencies through contracts with the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) and U.S. Transportation Command, which provides support to Department of Defense agencies.  Under these contracts, UPS guaranteed delivery of packages by certain specified times the following day.  The settlement announced today resolves allegations that from 2004 to 2014, UPS engaged in practices that concealed its failure to comply with its delivery guarantees, thereby depriving federal customers of the ability to request refunds for the late delivery of packages.  In particular, the government alleged that UPS knowingly recorded inaccurate delivery times on packages to make it appear that the packages were delivered on time, applied inapplicable “exception codes” to excuse late delivery  (such as “security delay,” “customer not in,” or “business closed”), and provided inaccurate “on-time” performance data under the federal contracts.

“The United States should get what it pays for, nothing less,” said Acting Inspector General Robert C. Erickson of the GSA.

The civil settlement resolves a lawsuit filed under the whistleblower provision of the False Claims Act, which permits private parties to file suit on behalf of the United States for false claims and obtain a portion of the government’s recovery.  The civil lawsuit was filed in the Eastern District of Virginia by Robert K. Fulk, a former employee of UPS, who will receive $3.75 million.

The resolution in this matter was the result of a coordinated effort between the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Eastern District of Virginia, the GSA Office of Inspector General (OIG), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation OIG, the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration and the Department of Treasury OIG, with assistance from the Department of Veterans Affairs OIG.

The lawsuit is captioned United States ex rel. Fulk v. United Parcel Service, Inc., et al., No. 1:11cv890 (E.D. Va.).  The claims resolved by this settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

New Orleans Jury Convicts Two Doctors, a Nurse and an Office Manager for Roles in $50 Million Fraud Scheme

Posted on by

Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Kenneth A. Polite of the Eastern District of Louisiana, Special Agent in Charge Michael J. Anderson of the FBI’s New Orleans Field Office, Special Agent in Charge Mike Fields of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Inspector General (HHS-OIG) Dallas Regional Office and Louisiana Attorney General James D. “Buddy” Caldwell made the announcement.

Barbara Smith, M.D., 66, of Metairie, Louisiana; Roy Berkowitz, M.D., 69, of Slidell, Louisiana; Beverly Breaux, 67, of New Orleans; and Joe Ann Murthil, 57, of New Orleans, were convicted on all counts after a five-day jury trial before Chief U.S. District Court Judge Sarah S. Vance of the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Evidence introduced at trial showed that the defendants and others carried out a home health care fraud scheme in and around New Orleans through multiple companies over the course of more than 10 years.  Smith and Berkowitz falsely claimed that thousands of Medicare recipients were homebound and required nursing or therapy services to be provided in their homes.  Breaux was a registered nurse who falsely certified that these patients were homebound, and falsely claimed to have treated patients that she had not seen.  Murthil was an office manager and biller at one home health company who assisted with the payment of illegal kickbacks to patient recruiters.  Murthil also submitted false claims to Medicare stating that patients were homebound when some of these patients had jobs, had not received services or did not want services.  From 2007 through 2014, the companies in this scheme submitted more than $56 million in claims to Medicare, the vast majority of which were fraudulent.  Medicare paid approximately $50.7 million on these claims.

Sentencing for the defendants is scheduled for Aug. 26, 2015.  In total, 13 defendants have been charged for their roles in this scheme.  Nine other defendants previously pleaded guilty.

This case was investigated by the FBI, HHS-OIG and the Louisiana Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, under the supervision of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Eastern District of Louisiana.  This case was prosecuted by Trial Attorneys William Kanellis and Antonio Pozos and Assistant Chief Ben Curtis of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section.

Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, now operating in nine cities across the country, has charged nearly 2,100 defendants who have collectively billed the Medicare program for more than $6.5 billion.  In addition, the HHS Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with the HHS-OIG, are taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.

Thomas Farmer Acquitted Puerto Rico Shipping Price Fixing Trial

Posted on by

by Leave a Comment

After a three-week trial, Thomas Farmer, a former Crowley Liner Services Vice-President was acquitted of price-fixing and bid rigging charges by a jury in Puerto Rico. The trial was before Federal District Court Judge Daniel Dominguez. The jury was composed of six men and six women. They deliberated for three hours before returning their verdict. Framer had been indicted on March 21, 2013 on a charge of conspiracy to fix and rig Puerto Rico freight surcharges with counterparts from Horizon Lines and Sea Star Line in the U.S. mainland-Puerto Rico trade.

The acquittal marks the end of the Antitrust Division’s otherwise successful investigation into price-fixing on ocean shipping route between Puerto Rico and the United States. Farmer was the second executive to go to trial. Frank Peake, the former President of Sea Star, was convicted in 2013 on a similar charge (here). Peake’s case was noteworthy in that he was sentenced to five years in prison, a record sentence for a Sherman Act conviction (here). The Peake trial came after subordinates of his and co-conspirators from other companies had pled guilty and cooperated with the government. Peak’s direct subordinate at Sea Star, Peter Baci, was sentenced to 48 months in prison and fined $20,000. Peake’s counterpart at Horizon, Gabriel Serra, was sentenced to 34 months in prison. Other executives at Sea Star and Horizon had pled guilty, and received prison terms ranging from seven months to 29 months. Three companies have paid more than $46 million in fines for their involvement in a conspiracy that included setting rates, bid rigging and other practices.

Farmer faced a maximum sentence of ten years in prison. Farmer was represented by Joseph C. Laws, Melanie Matos Gilroy Cardona and Terrance Reed.  Farmer was facing a maximum of ten years in prison if convicted and his legal team deserves great credit for the best outcome Farmer could have hoped for.  But, there are great difficulties that the Antitrust Division faces in a “last man standing trial.”  I am not familiar with the specifics of the Farmer trial but some of these inherent difficulties are:

  • Staleness:  Farmer was indicted in March 2013.  The indictment charged a conspiracy: “From at least as early as mid-2005, to in or about April 2008.”  So, Farmer was indicted just before the five-year statute of limitations expired.  His trial did not begin until more than two years after indictment.  Farmer was tried in 2015 for conduct that ended in early 2008.  Antitrust violations do not “shock the conscience” the way a crime of violence might, and the long delay between conduct and trial can diminish whatever “jury appeal” a price-fixing case might have had.
  • Witness Fatigue:  When a witness signs a cooperation agreement with the Antitrust Division, he usually doesn’t realize that his cooperation may last longer than many marriages.  It can be difficult to work with a witness who has long since (hoped) he had put this chapter of his life behind him.  Witness prep so many years after the alleged conduct occured can involve an increasing frequency of “I’m not sure.  That was a really long time ago.”  And, in this case it was.
  • Prior Statements:  As I said, I have not read the record in the Farmer case so I do not know who the witnesses were.  But, there is a good chance some of the witnesses previously testified in the Peake trial.  So besides witness fatigue and faded recollections, defense attorneys have prior statements to work with on cross-examination.
  • The Weak Cases Are The Ones That Go To Trial:  It used to be fair to say that the Antitrust Division got plea agreements from those who they had the strongest cases against, but often found itself trying weaker cases, sometimes against senior managers that had insulated themselves from most of the illegal conduct.  But, my opinion is that today cases go to trial because the sentencing guidelines are so severe (based on volume of commerce) that the “last man standing,” who can’t get a 5K cooperation agreement/downward departure, has little to lose by going to trial.  Mr. Farmer went to trial because he declared he was innocent and a jury did in fact acquit him.  But, even a guilty party might go to trial because: (a) he has at least a chance at acquittal; (b) even if convicted at trial, he will likely be sentenced to less time than he could have negotiated with the Antitrust Division pursuant to a recommended guidelines plea agreement; and (c) in any event he can appeal and hope to get a conviction reversed on appeal.  In essence, the trial is an extended sentencing hearing, with a chance of acquittal, and even if convicted, a hope the conviction can be overturned.  I co-authored an article “A Peek Behind the Record Peake Sentence” (here) that explored some of these ideas.

Congratulations to Farmer’s defense team and also to the Antitrust Division for an otherwise very successful investigation.

Thanks for reading.

Thirty-Three Defendants Charged in Massive Criminal Conspiracies Including Allegations of Fraud, Prescription Drug Diversion, and Money Laundering

Posted on by
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, May 7, 2015

Thirty-two people were arrested yesterday after being charged variously with racketeering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit identity theft, conspiracy to commit access device fraud, conspiracy to commit mail, wire and bank fraud, conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to use a facility of interstate commerce to commit murder-for-hire and conspiracy to engage in the unlicensed wholesale distribution of drugs, announced U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag of the Northern District of California, Special Agent in Charge David J. Johnson of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Special Agent in Charge José M. Martinez of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Criminal Investigation.  A thirty-third defendant remains at large and is subject to an active arrest warrant.

According to an indictment that was unsealed yesterday, Ara Karapedyan, 45, Mihran Stepanyan, 29, and Artur Stepanyan, 38, were at the center of a nationwide conspiracy—with at least 18 other person—to conduct the affairs of a wide-ranging criminal enterprise through a pattern of racketeering.  This enterprise was fueled by a broad range of criminal activity including unlicensed wholesale drug distribution, money laundering and fraud.  The indictment names 33 defendants in all and describes an enterprise that spanned throughout California as well as in Minnesota, Ohio and Puerto Rico.

One key aspect of the alleged criminal activity described in the indictment was a multi-million dollar prescription drug diversion scheme.  Members and associates of the enterprise are alleged to have procured prescription drugs from unlicensed sources and to have resold the drugs to unknowing customers.  A central figure to these allegations is David Miller, 50.  Miller is alleged to be the owner and operator of a drug wholesaler called Minnesota Independent Cooperative (MIC) that, between 2010 and 2014, bought approximately $157 million of drugs from Mihran Stepanyan and Artur Stepanyan.  Miller and his employees allegedly knew the Stepanyans were not licensed to sell drugs and knew the Stepanyans procured their drugs through unlicensed sources.  Miller and his employees nevertheless purchased the drugs from the Stepanyans’ various companies, including Panda Capital Group, Red Rock Capital, Trans Atlantic Capital, GC National Wholesale, Sky Atlantic Capital and Nationwide Payment Solutions and resold the drugs as legitimate products.

A separate investigation has resulted in another indictment in the Southern District of Ohio charging David Miller, Mihran Stepanyan, Artur Stepanyan and MIC with various crimes arising from their sale of millions of dollars of illicitly-procured drugs.

The indictment also charges Karapedyan and his associates with engaging in the fraudulent unlicensed distribution of drugs.  For instance, from 2013 through 2015, Karapedyan, either personally or through an associate, sold several hundred thousand dollars’ worth of drugs such as Abilify, Liboderm, Cymbalta and Namenda, as well as HIV drugs such as Atripla, Truvada and Isentress and the cancer drug Gleevec.  Likewise, from roughly the latter part of 2014 through early 2015, Karapdyan and his racketeer co-conspirator Maxwell Starsky, 36, sold to another complicit wholesaler more than $1 million in illicitly procured drugs.  Karapedyan also supplied the Stepanyans with drugs.

Hugo Marquez, 41, Eric Figueroa, 29, Arman Zagaryan, 32, and their associates are likewise charged with procuring drugs from unlicensed sources and distributing the drugs to buyers.  According to the indictment, Alexander Soliman, 46, was one of their principal customers.  Between roughly 2012 and 2014, Soliman, through his companies Apex Pharmaceuticals and Maroon Pharma, knowingly purchased illicitly-procured drugs from Marquez, Figueroa and Zagaryan and then re-sold them as legitimate drugs.  During this time period, Marquez, Figueroa, Zargaryan and Soliman engaged in the distribution of more than $20 million worth of drugs.

Another aspect of the alleged criminal activity is a massive check and bank fraud operation.  As part of the enterprise, Karapedyan and his associates, including Asatour Magzanyan, 53, Tigran Sarkisyan, 38, and Hripsime Khachtryan, 41, allegedly used fraudulent identification information to prepare fraudulent tax returns, which were then filed with the government in order to induce the U.S. Treasury to issue tax refund checks.  Karapedyan associate Khachig Geuydjian, 74, allegedly used his unlicensed mail-box business to provide addresses for these fraudulent tax filings.  They and other members and associates of the enterprise then negotiated the tax refund checks using fraudulent identities or through a complicit check cashing business operated by Jean Dukmajian, 61, Karine Dukmajian, 33, and Angela Dukmajian, 26.  In addition to the tax refund scheme, members and associates of the enterprise also engaged in negotiating counterfeit and stolen checks.  In all, from roughly late 2012 to late 2014, Karapedyan and his associates negotiated more than 500 fraudulent checks worth more than $5 million.

In addition to the fraudulent unlicensed distribution of drugs and negotiating fraudulent checks, Karapedyan, the Stepanyans, Miller and others are charged with conspiring to launder money in an effort to promote their criminal activities and to conceal proceeds collected from their criminal activities.  For example, a description of Miller’s activity between 2012 through 2014, wherein he attempted to hide the fact he was paying the Stepanyans for drugs is alleged in the indictment.  The indictment further alleges Miller made the payments to the Stepanyans’ company GC National Wholesale through companies in Puerto Rico he controlled, such as B&Y Wholesalers and FMC Distributors.  The payments were for sales of drugs that the Stepanyans actually delivered to Miller’s company MIC.  Similarly, the indictment includes allegations Karapedyan and Starsky also arranged payments for more than $1 million of illicitly-procured drugs through a shell company.  In addition, Karapedyan also allegedly laundered money for the Stepanyans.  According to the indictment, in 2013, the Stepanyans transferred more than $1 million in proceeds derived from MIC to Karapedyan, who caused the money to be withdrawn as cash.

Furthermore, in addition to the foregoing, defendants Karapedyan and Gevork Ter-Mkrtchyan are charged with conspiring to use a facility of interstate commerce to commit murder-for-hire.  According to the indictment, these defendants made several attempts to find a person who would be willing to kill someone who had angered Ter-Mkrtchyan.  Although the defendants paid $1,500 for the hit, it was never carried out.

According to the indictment, a significant portion of the criminal activity took place in the Northern District of California.  For example, one delivery of drugs took place in the Northern District of California and many of the checks were negotiated in the Northern District as well.  In addition, much of the proceeds from the check and the drug schemes were laundered through the Northern District of California, where Karapedyan and his associates regularly picked up large amounts of cash.  In addition, Miller’s company, MIC, posted fraudulent information relating to the origins of the drugs he sold via a website.  The website was maintained by an Internet service provider in the Northern District of California.  Furthermore, Karapedyan made numerous calls to the Northern District of California in order to find individuals willing to perform the hit he sought.

An indictment merely alleges that crimes have been committed, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.   All the defendants except Miller were arrested yesterday.  Miller remains at large and is the subject of an active arrest warrant.

In sum, the indictment includes seven counts as follows: count One, RICO conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) (maximum term of imprisonment, life or 20 years); Count Two, conspiracy to commit identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §  1028(f) (maximum term of imprisonment, 15 years); Count Three, conspiracy to commit access device fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1029(b)(2) (maximum term of imprisonment, 5 years); Count Four, conspiracy to commit mail, wire, and bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349; Count Five, conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) (maximum term of imprisonment, 20 years); Count Six, conspiracy to use interstate facility to commit murder-for-hire, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1958); Count Seven, conspiracy to engage in unlicensed wholesale distribution of drugs, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (maximum term of imprisonment, 5 years).

The following charges apply as against the following defendants are: Ara Karapedyan on Counts one through seven, Mihran Stepanyan on counts one through five and seven, Artur Stepanyan on counts one through five and seven, Gevork Ter-Mkrtchyan on counts 1-7, Khachig Geuydjian on counts one through five, Arman Petrosyan on counts one through five, Lanna Karapedyan on counts one through five, Maxwell Starsky on counts one through five and seven, Sevak Gharghani on counts one through five and seven, Jean Dukmajian, on counts one through five, Karine Dukmajian on counts one through five, Angela Dukmajian on counts one through five, Arman Danielian count one, four, five and seven, Asatour Magzanyan conts one through five, Tigran Sarkisyan counts one through five, Hripsime Khachtryan counts one through five, Loui Artin on counts one through five, Hugo Marquez on counts one through five and seven, Arman Zargaryan on counts one through five and seven, Dmitriy Kustov on counts two through four, Michael Inman on counts two through four, Araxia Nazaryian on counts two five and seven, Alexander Soliman on counts four, five and seven, Cheryl Barndt on counts four, five and seven, Eric Figueroa on counts four, five and seven, Marc Asheghian on counts four, five and seven, Michael Asheghian on counts four, five and seven, David Milleron cunts one through five and seven, James Russoon on counts four, five and seven, Jeannette Couch counts four, five and seven, Marie Polichetti counts four, five and seven, Bernardo Guillen counts four, five and seven, Javier Ramirez on counts four and seven.

Additional periods of supervised release, fines and special assessments also could be imposed.  Any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.

Thirty-one defendants appeared before the Honorable Victor B. Kenton and Michael R. Wilner in the Central District of California on Wednesday, May 6, 2015, to be advised of the charges against them and to determine conditions of release.  Some of those hearings have been continued at the request of the defendants.  Specifically, the bail hearing for Eric Figueroa has been continued to Friday, May 8, 2015, and the hearings for Hugo Marquez and Michael Inman have been continued to Monday, May 11, 2015, before the Honorable Michael R. Wilner.  In addition, Karapedyan will appear on Friday, May 8, 2015, before the Honorable Victor B. Kenton.

Further, Ter-Mkrtchyan has requested a hearing in which the government will be required to prove his identity, i.e., that he is the individual named in the indictment.  That hearing will occur on Friday, May 8, 2015, before the Honorable Victor B. Kenton.

The remaining 26 defendants have been ordered to appear before the Honorable Jacqueline Scott Corley in the Northern District of California. Alexander Soliman, Araxia Nazaryian and Asatour Magzanyan will appear on May 12, 2015.  Cheryl Barndt, Marc Asheghian, Michael Asheghian, Hripsime Khachtryan, Bernardo Guillen, Javier Ramirez, Jean Dukmajian, Karine Dukmajian, Angela Dukmajian, Khachig Geuydjian and Arman Zargaryan will appear on May 20, 2015.  Jeannette Couch, Loui Artin, Dmitriy Kustov, Marie Polichetti, Arman Danielian, Lanna Karapedyan, Sevak Gharghani, Arman Petrosyan and Maxwell Starsky will appear on May 22, 2015.

Mihran Stepanyan, Artur Stepanyan and Tigran Sarkisyan are being transported to the Northern District of California by the U.S. Marshal Service and will make court appearances after their arrival.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Damali A. Taylor, David Countryman and W.S. Wilson Leung are prosecuting the case with the assistance of Lance Libatique, Ponly Tu, Daniel Charlier-Smith.  The prosecution is the result of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Internal Revenue Service.



Posted on by

Company Must Pay $232.7 Million Penalty

The U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia entered a formal judgment yesterday memorializing the sentence requiring Schlumberger Oilfield Holdings Ltd. (SOHL), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Schlumberger Ltd, to pay a $232,708,356 penalty to the United States for conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) by willfully facilitating illegal transactions and engaging in trade with Iran and Sudan.

The judgment was announced by Assistant Attorney General for National Security John P. Carlin, Acting U.S. Attorney Vincent H. Cohen Jr. of the District of Columbia and Under Secretary Eric L. Hirschhorn of the U.S. Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS).

At a hearing on April 30, 2015, the District Judge John D. Bates of the District of Columbia accepted the company’s guilty plea and sentenced the company to the proposed sentence articulated in the plea agreement, which called for the fine and other terms of corporate probation.  The court recognized the seriousness of SOHL’s criminal conduct, which posed a threat to our national security.  In addition, the court noted that the scope of criminal conduct justified the large monetary penalty imposed.  Finally, the court concluded that the terms of probation provided adequate deterrence to SOHL as well as other companies.  Yesterday, the court entered the written judgment confirming the sentence imposed on April 30, 2015.

“The court’s judgment represents a milestone in the enforcement of U.S. sanctions laws,” said Assistant Attorney General Carlin.  “This case marks the first conviction of a corporate entity for facilitating violations of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act and the highest criminal fine ever imposed in a sanctions prosecution.  The Court’s imposition of this serious sentence should serve as a strong deterrent for multinational corporations doing any business in countries subject to U.S. economic sanctions.”

“This guilty plea and sentence hold this company accountable for violating trade laws by doing business with sanctioned countries and undermining the interests of the United States,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Cohen. “We hope that other companies tempted to break our export laws take note of the $232.7 million penalty that will be paid in this case.”

The criminal information and plea agreement were filed on March 25, 2015, in federal court in the District of Columbia, charging SOHL with one count of knowingly and willfully conspiring to violate IEEPA.  The plea agreement that the court approved also requires SOHL to submit to a three-year period of corporate probation and agree to continue to cooperate with the government and not commit any additional felony violations of U.S. federal law.  SOHL’s monetary penalty includes a $77,569,452 criminal forfeiture and an additional $155,138,904 criminal fine.  The criminal fine represents the largest criminal fine in connection with an IEEPA prosecution.  In addition to SOHL’s commitments, under the plea agreement SOHL’s parent company, Schlumberger Ltd., has also agreed to the following terms during the three-year term of probation, among others: maintaining its cessation of all operations in Iran and Sudan, reporting on the parent company’s compliance with sanctions, responding to requests to disclose information and materials related to the parent company’s compliance with U.S. sanctions laws when requested by U.S. authorities, and hiring an independent consultant to review the parent company’s internal sanctions policies and procedures and the parent company’s internal audits focused on sanctions compliance.

The court agreed that in addition to SOHL continuing its cooperation with U.S. authorities throughout the three-year period of probation and agreeing not to engage in any felony violation of U.S. federal law, SOHL’s parent company, Schlumberger Ltd., will also hire an independent consultant who will review the parent company’s internal sanctions policies, procedures and company-generated sanctions audit reports.

According to court documents, starting on or about early 2004 and continuing through June 2010, Drilling & Measurements (D&M), a United States-based Schlumberger business segment, provided oilfield services to Schlumberger customers in Iran and Sudan through non-U.S. subsidiaries of SOHL.  Although SOHL, as a subsidiary of Schlumberger Ltd., had policies and procedures designed to ensure that D&M did not violate U.S. sanctions, SOHL failed to train its employees adequately to ensure that all U.S. persons, including non-U.S. citizens who resided in the United States while employed at D&M, complied with Schlumberger Ltd.’s sanctions policies and compliance procedures.  As a result of D&M’s lack of adherence to U.S. sanctions combined with SOHL’s failure to train properly U.S. persons and to enforce fully its policies and procedures, D&M, through the acts of employees residing in the United States, violated U.S. sanctions against Iran and Sudan by: (1) approving and disguising the company’s capital expenditure requests from Iran and Sudan for the manufacture of new oilfield drilling tools and for the spending of money for certain company purchases; (2) making and implementing business decisions specifically concerning Iran and Sudan; and (3) providing certain technical services and expertise in order to troubleshoot mechanical failures and to sustain expensive drilling tools and related equipment in Iran and Sudan.

The investigation that commenced in 2009 was led by the Justice Department’s National Security Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the District of Columbia and the U.S. Department of Commerce BIS’ Dallas Field Office.  Assistant Attorney General Carlin is grateful to Special Agent Troy Shaffer from BIS’ Dallas Field Office for his excellent work.  Assistant Attorney General Carlin also acknowledged the work of those who handled the case from the National Security Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office, including former Trial Attorney Ryan Fayhee and former Assistant U.S. Attorneys John Borchert and Ann H. Petalas.

The case was prosecuted by Trial Attorney Casey Arrowood of the National Security Division, Assistant U.S. Attorney Maia L. Miller of the National Security Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Zia Faruqui of the District of Columbia.