Understanding DOJ's New Guidance on False Claims Act
“This puts it all on one page. It gives companies and individuals clearer rules of the road in terms of what will be considered,” said one white-collar defense attorney.
May 10, 2019 at 03:34 PM
4 minute read
The U.S. Department of Justice has published its policy on the factors that prosecutors can consider when determining whether to reduce civil penalties in False Claims Act cases as a way to reward companies for being cooperative—and the white-collar defense bar is applauding.
“This is the first time that there's been formal guidance in the Justice Manual,” said Ted Kang, a partner at Alston & Bird in Washington, D.C., and a former prosecutor for the DOJ's criminal division. “It's helpful in the sense that there's formal guidance that applies across the board to all federal prosecutors.”
In the past, prosecutors might have considered certain factors in awarding cooperation credit, such as a company self-reporting a violation to the government, but ignored or missed others when determining the civil penalties in a FCA case.
Now, defendants can point to the written policy to ensure that every possible factor is on the government's radar when a case is being resolved. The new guidelines reinforce the DOJ's long-standing appreciation of companies that blow the whistle on themselves, cooperate in investigations and address the issues at the root of a violation.
“This puts it all on one page. It gives companies and individuals clearer rules of the road in terms of what will be considered,” Kang said. He added having written guidance also gives in-house counsel something tangible to take to executives when lobbying for more compliance resources.
Meredith Auten, a partner at Morgan Lewis who focuses on FCA litigation, viewed the policy as a “road map for handling these [FCA] investigations,” one that she said will help defense attorneys in “trying to come to the most favorable resolution” for their clients.
Auten noted that, under the guidelines, the DOJ is incentivizing self-disclosure not only by dangling the carrot of reduced civil penalties but also by offering to make other government agencies, including the Office of Inspector General, aware of the fact that a company is cooperating in an investigation.
“This can be very significant, because one of the major sticking points in any FCA resolution is often, 'What is the OIG going to do with this?'” she said.
Auten also appreciated that the DOJ has offered, as a credit, to help cooperating companies resolve qui tam litigation with whistleblowers.
“What is the relator looking for as far as recovery? What fees are the relator's attorneys looking for?” she said. “Those can be very significant numbers that can have an impact on a resolution.”
The DOJ's official policy on cooperation credit is clearer now. That much is certain. But what remains to be seen is whether this new clarity will spur more companies to come forward and tell the government about potential FCA violations.
“Voluntary disclosures are such a tricky and difficult decision,” she said. “It's very fact and circumstance dependent—and there are no guarantees. You see in the policy they've issued that the word 'discretion' appears repeatedly throughout the guidance.”
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All2024 in Review: Judges Met Out Punishments for Ex-Apple, FDIC, Moody's Legal Leaders
Financial Watchdog Alleges Walmart Forced Army of Gig-Worker Drivers to Receive Pay Through High-Fee Accounts
GC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
Trending Stories
- 1The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 2Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 3Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 4Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
- 5Judge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250