District Not Recorded

A former doctor of osteopathic medicine who previously worked at the Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center in Beckley, West Virginia, was sentenced today for depriving veterans of their civil rights under color of law by sexually abusing them.

U.S. District Judge Frank W. Volk sentenced Jonathan Yates, 52, of Bluefield, Virginia, to 300 months in prison and three years of supervised release, announced Deputy Assistant Attorney General Gregory B. Friel of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, U.S. Attorney Michael B. Stuart of the Southern District of West Virginia, Special Agent in Charge Michael A. Christman of the Pittsburgh Division of the FBI, and VA Inspector General Michael J. Missal.

Yates previously pleaded guilty on Sept. 17, 2020, to three felony counts of deprivation of rights under color of law. According to the plea documents, Yates rubbed the genitals of two veterans and digitally penetrated a third veteran’s rectum under the guise of legitimate medicine, when in fact he acted without a legitimate medical purpose. This conduct, performed while Yates was acting under color of law in his capacity as a VA physician and a federal employee, deprived the veterans of their constitutional right to bodily integrity and caused them pain. According to the plea documents, the veterans had sought treatment from Yates to manage chronic pain through osteopathic manipulative therapy. Several veterans addressed the court at sentencing, describing the trauma and mental anguish that Yates had caused them. Yates surrendered his medical licenses as a condition of his plea agreement.

“The sentence today reflects the seriousness of this defendant’s misconduct. In a despicable betrayal of his oath, he used his specialized medical knowledge and expertise to sexually abuse his own patients. He has now been held accountable,” said Deputy Assistant Attorney General Gregory B. Friel of the Civil Rights Division. “It is a testament to the bravery of our veterans that so many came forward to bring this defendant to justice.”

“Military veterans who serve and sacrifice to protect our nation deserve only the best of care. Yates betrayed his oath as a physician and the veterans under his care,” said U.S. Attorney Michael Stuart for the Southern District of West Virginia. “Today, Yates has been called to account for his heinous acts. While his prison sentence will not undo the significant harm Yates inflicted on the victims, we hope that it will ease their pain. I want to commend the incredible work of the FBI and the Department of Veterans Affairs-OIG in this investigation. I also want to thank the victims and their families for their unwavering support during the prosecution of this case.”

“Yates committed hideous crimes in a hospital room, which should be a sanctuary for patients,” said FBI Pittsburgh Special Agent in Charge Michael Christman. “The facts of this case are disgusting and these patients and their families deserved better care. While today’s sentence won’t take away what happened to these patients who dedicated their lives in service to our nation, Yates will never be able to hurt anyone again. Hopefully, this will serve as justice for his victims.”

“This sentence is the culmination of the exceptional work of the Office of the Inspector General special agents and our law enforcement partners,” said VA Inspector General Michael J. Missal. “Our thoughts are with the veterans who suffered horrific abuse by a doctor entrusted with their care, and we remain vigilant in our efforts to keep all VA patients safe from harm.”

The case was investigated by the FBI, the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General, and the Veterans Affairs Police Department. The case was prosecuted by Special Litigation Counsel Samantha Trepel and Trial Attorney Kyle Boynton of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, Assistant U.S. Attorney Greg McVey of the Southern District of West Virginia, and Assistant Chief Kilby MacFadden of the Fraud Section of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Related court documents and information may be found on the website of the District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia at http://www.wvsd.uscourts.gov/ or on http://pacer.wvsd.uscourts.gov/.

The Department of Justice, together with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), today announced three settlements resolving alleged violations of the Better Online Ticket Sales (BOTS) Act.  These are the first enforcement actions that the department and the FTC have brought under the BOTS Act. 

Enacted in 2016, the BOTS Act aims to prevent ticket brokers from buying large numbers of event tickets and reselling them to interested customers at inflated prices.  To achieve that goal, the BOTS Act prohibits a person from circumventing access controls or measures used by online ticket sellers (such as Ticketmaster) to enforce ticket-purchasing limits.  It also prevents the resale of tickets obtained by knowingly circumventing access controls.

As alleged in the three complaints filed by the United States, the defendants — Just In Time Tickets Inc. and its owner Evan Kohanian; Concert Specials Inc. and its owner Steven Ebrani; and Cartisim Corp. and its owner Simon Ebrani — committed violations of the BOTS Act to purchase from Ticketmaster thousands of tickets they then resold for millions of dollars in revenues, often at significant markups.  The defendants are alleged to have circumvented Ticketmaster’s restrictions on users holding multiple accounts by creating accounts in the names of family members, friends, and fictitious individuals, and using hundreds of credit cards.  They also allegedly used ticket bots to fool tests designed to prevent nonhuman visitors.  In addition, the complaints assert that the defendants used programs to conceal the IP addresses of the computers they used to make purchases. 

“These defendants are alleged to have cheated the system to the detriment of consumers,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton of the Justice Department’s Civil Division.  “Today’s filing serves notice that the Department of Justice will enforce the Better Online Ticket Sales Act in appropriate cases.  We are pleased to work with our partners at the Federal Trade Commission on this and other matters important to consumers.”

“Those who violate the BOTS Act cheat fans by forcing them to pay inflated prices to attend concerts, theater performances and sporting events,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Seth D. DuCharme for the Eastern District of New York.  “This office will spare no effort in prohibiting deceptive practices that harm consumers.”

The three stipulated orders entered by the court assess civil penalties of $11.2 million against Just In Time Tickets Inc. and Kohanian, $16 million against Concert Specials Inc. and Steven Ebrani, and $4.4 million against Cartisim Corp. and Simon Ebrani, allowing suspension of a portion of such civil penalties if the defendants satisfy certain terms.  The orders further provide for the suspension of the remainder of such civil penalties if the defendants pay $1,642,658.96, $1,565,527.41, and $499,147,12, respectively, and satisfy certain additional terms.  The stipulated orders also contain terms to prohibit the defendants from using ticket bots or other computer programs to defeat access controls, from concealing the IP addresses of computers they use to make ticket purchases, and from purchasing tickets from any credit or debit account in the name of anyone other than the defendants or their corporate officers and employees.  Under the terms, the defendants must also maintain records and provide compliance reports to the government.

This matter was handled by Trial Attorney Benjamin A. Cornfeld of the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Bonni J. Perlin and Kevin Yim from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York.  Christine M. Todaro and Frances L. Kern represented the FTC.

For more information about the Consumer Protection Branch and its enforcement efforts, visit its website at https://www.justice.gov/civil/consumer-protection-branch. For more information about the FTC, visit its website at https://www.FTC.gov.

ROCKFORD — A former employee of the City of Rochelle was charged today with fraudulently obtaining at least $150,000 from a non-profit business association.

SCOTT KOTESKI, 58, of Rochelle, is charged with one count of wire fraud, according to a criminal information filed in federal court in Rockford.  Arraignment has not yet been scheduled.

The charge was announced by John R. Lausch, Jr., United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois; and Emmerson Buie, Jr., Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago Field Office of the FBI.  The Illinois State Police assisted in the investigation.  The government is represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Scott R. Paccagnini.

According to the information, Koteski was selected by the city to sit on the board of directors of a non-profit business association that provided broadband internet technology to smaller municipalities in northern Illinois.  Starting in 2011, Koteski was selected as the treasurer of that association.  As treasurer, Koteski handled the invoicing and billing of the member municipalities, and as of February 2012 had signatory authority on the association’s bank account.  According to the information, from September 2012 through April 2018, Koteski fraudulently obtained from the association at least $150,000, which he used for his own benefit without the association’s knowledge or consent.  Koteski wrote numerous checks to himself from the association’s bank account and deposited them into a personal account for his benefit, the information states. 

Koteski allegedly concealed his acts by writing false information on the memo line to make it appear the checks were for reimbursement of personal monies Koteski spent for the association when, in fact, Koteski was not entitled to reimbursement.  In 2018, Koteski made online payments from the association’s bank account to a credit card company to pay balances on his personal credit card, and to an online loan financing company to pay balances on Koteski’s loan, the information states.

Wire fraud carries a maximum sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment.  If convicted, the Court must impose a reasonable sentence under federal sentencing statutes and the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines.

The public is reminded that an information is not evidence of guilt.  The defendant is presumed innocent and entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Department of Justice, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) announced a settlement with Dow Chemical Company and two subsidiaries, Performance Materials NA Inc. and Union Carbide Corporation, that will eliminate thousands of tons of air pollution from four of Dow’s petrochemical manufacturing facilities in Texas and Louisiana.

The settlement resolves allegations that Dow and its subsidiaries violated the Clean Air Act by failing to properly operate and monitor industrial flares at their petrochemical facilities, which resulted in excess emissions of harmful air pollution. 

The complaint, filed Tuesday along with the settlement, alleges that Dow and its subsidiaries “oversteamed” their flares and failed to comply with other key operating parameters that ensure the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and hazardous air pollutants contained in the gases routed to the flares are effectively combusted.

The companies will spend approximately $294 million to install and operate air pollution control and monitoring technology to reduce flaring and the resulting harmful air pollution from 26 industrial flares at the companies’ facilities in: Hahnville, Louisiana; Plaquemine, Louisiana; Freeport, Texas; and Orange, Texas.

Once fully implemented, the pollution controls required by the settlement are estimated to reduce harmful air emissions of VOCs by more than 5,600 tons per year. The settlement is also expected to reduce toxic air pollutants, including benzene, by nearly 500 tons per year.

“This settlement will improve air quality in Texas and Louisiana by eliminating thousands of tons of harmful air pollution each year,” said Jonathan D. Brightbill, Acting Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.  “The agreement, which requires Dow to reduce emissions from its facilities in Texas and Louisiana, demonstrates the Justice Department’s and EPA’s  continuing efforts, together with our state partners, to reduce harmful air pollution from unnecessary and improper flaring in order to protect the American public by bringing sources of air pollution into compliance with the Clean Air Act.”

“This settlement means cleaner air for communities across Texas and Louisiana and reinforces EPA’s commitment to enforce the law and hold those who violate it accountable,” said Susan Bodine, Assistant Administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “As this agreement shows, EPA is dedicated to partnering with states to address critical environmental issues and improve compliance in the regulated community to prevent future violations of the law.”

“The Clean Air Act provides a blueprint for industry to operate in a safe and controlled fashion,” said Dr. Chuck Carr Brown, LDEQ Secretary. “LDEQ will continue to work with our federal partners, EPA and the Justice Department, to finalize agreements that settle both long- and short-term compliance issues. Every citizen of Louisiana will benefit from the Beneficial Environmental Project portion of the settlement.”

The pollutants addressed by the settlement can cause significant harm to public health. VOCs are a key component in the formation of smog or ground-level ozone, a pollutant that irritates the lungs, exacerbates diseases such as asthma, and can increase susceptibility to respiratory illnesses, such as pneumonia and bronchitis. Chronic exposure to benzene, which EPA classifies as a carcinogen, can cause numerous health impacts, including leukemia and adverse reproductive effects in women.

Flares are devices used to combust waste gases that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere during certain industrial operations. Well-operated flares should have high “combustions efficiency,” meaning they combust nearly all harmful waste gas constituents, like VOCs and hazardous air pollutants, and turn them into water and carbon dioxide. The agreement is designed to improve Dow’s flaring practices. First, it requires Dow to minimize the amount of waste gas that is sent to the flares, which reduces the amount of flaring. Second, Dow must improve the combustion efficiency of its flares when flaring is necessary. 

In order to minimize the waste gas sent to the flares at each facility, Dow will operate flare gas recovery systems that recover and “recycle” the gases instead of sending them to be combusted in a flare. The flare gas recovery systems will allow Dow to reuse these gases as a fuel at its facilities or a product for sale. Dow will also create waste minimization plans for each facility to further reduce flaring. For flaring that must occur, the agreement requires that Dow install and operate instruments and monitoring systems to ensure that the gases sent to its flares are efficiently combusted. Dow will also perform air quality monitoring that is designed to detect the presence of benzene at the fence lines of the four covered plants and pay a civil penalty of $3 million.

The LDEQ will receive $675,000 of the $3 million total civil penalty, and Dow will perform three state-authorized “beneficial environmental projects” in Louisiana that were negotiated by Louisiana.

More information about this settlement can be found at https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/dow-chemical-company-performance-materials-na-inc-and-union-carbide-corporation-clean.

The consent decree, lodged in the Eastern District Court of Louisiana, is subject to a 30-day public comment period and final court approval. The consent decree will be available for viewing at https://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees.

The Justice Department, along with the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and U.S. Army Counterintelligence, announced today the arrest of a private first class in the U.S. Army, on federal terrorism charges based on Bridges’ alleged efforts to assist ISIS to attack and kill U.S. soldiers in the Middle East.

Cole James Bridges, aka Cole Gonzales, 20, of Stowe, Ohio, was charged by complaint with attempting to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization and attempting to murder U.S. military service members.  The FBI and U.S. Army Counterintelligence arrested Bridges today, and he will be presented later today in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia.

“Bridges is charged with giving military advice and guidance on how to kill fellow soldiers to individuals he thought were part of ISIS,” said Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers.  “This alleged personal and professional betrayal of comrades and country is terrible to contemplate, but fortunately, the FBI was able to identify the threat posed by Bridges, and today's charges are the first step in holding him accountable for his crimes.  ISIS ideology continues to infect those who would threaten the nation's security from within and without, and we will continue to fight this threat.”

“As alleged, Cole Bridges betrayed the oath he swore to defend the United States by attempting to provide ISIS with tactical military advice to ambush and kill his fellow service members,” said Acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Audrey Strauss.  “Our troops risk their lives for our country, but they should never face such peril at the hands of one of their own.  Today, thanks to the efforts of the agents and detectives of the JTTF, and our partners in the Department of Defense, Bridges is in custody and facing federal terrorism charges for his alleged crimes.”

“As we allege today, Bridges, a private in the U.S. Army, betrayed our country and his unit when he plotted with someone he believed was an ISIS sympathizer to help ISIS attack and kill U.S. soldiers in the Middle East,” said FBI Assistant Director in Charge of the New York Office William F. Sweeney Jr.  “Fortunately, the person with whom he communicated was an FBI employee, and we were able to prevent his evil desires from coming to fruition.  Bridges could have chosen a life of honorable service, but instead he traded it for the possibility of life in prison.  This case should serve as a reminder that the FBI’s New York JTTF will never quit in its commitment to protect our Nation from all those who seek to do it harm.”

“Army Counterintelligence’s top priority is protecting the force so it can remain committed to fighting and winning our nation’s wars,” said Army Counterintelligence Coordinating Authority Director Roy T. Cochran.  “The results of this investigation show the efforts of Army Counterintelligence agents working alongside our partners in the FBI.  We are dedicated to protecting our soldiers, civilians, and families from terrorist acts and insider threats.”

According to the criminal complaint charging Bridges, which was unsealed today in Manhattan federal court:

Bridges joined the U.S. Army in approximately September 2019 and was assigned as a cavalry scout in the 3rd Infantry Division based in Fort Stewart, Georgia.  Beginning in at least 2019, Bridges began researching and consuming online propaganda promoting jihadists and their violent ideology.  Bridges also expressed his support for the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) and jihad on social media.  In or about October 2020, Bridges began communicating with an FBI online covert employee (the “OCE”), who was posing as an ISIS supporter in contact with ISIS fighters in the Middle East.  During these communications, Bridges expressed his frustration with the U.S. military and his desire to aid ISIS.  Bridges then provided training and guidance to purported ISIS fighters who were planning attacks, including advice about potential targets in New York City, such as the 9/11 Memorial.  Bridges also provided the OCE with portions of a U.S. Army training manual and guidance about military combat tactics, for use by ISIS.

In or about December 2020, Bridges began to supply the OCE with instructions for the purported ISIS fighters on how to attack U.S. forces in the Middle East.  Among other things, Bridges diagrammed specific military maneuvers intended to help ISIS fighters maximize the lethality of attacks on U.S. troops.  Bridges further provided advice about the best way to fortify an ISIS encampment to repel an attack by U.S. Special Forces, including by wiring certain buildings with explosives to kill the U.S. troops.  Then, in January 2021, Bridges provided the OCE with a video of himself in body armor standing before a flag often used by ISIS fighters and making a gesture symbolic of support for ISIS.  Approximately a week later, Bridges sent a second video in which Bridges, using a voice manipulator, narrated a propaganda speech in support of the anticipated ambush by ISIS on U.S. troops.

Bridges is charged in the complaint with (1) attempting to provide material support to ISIS, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2339B, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison; and (2) attempting to murder U.S. military service members, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1114, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.  The statutory penalties are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendant would be determined by the judge.

The Justice Department praised the outstanding efforts of the FBI’s New York Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), which consists of agents and analysts from the FBI, the NYPD, and over 50 other federal, state, and local agencies, U.S. Army Counterintelligence, the FBI Washington Field Office, the FBI Atlanta Field Office and its Savannah Resident Agency, the FBI Cleveland Field Office, the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Georgia, the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command, and the U.S. Army 3rd Infantry Division.

This prosecution is being handled by the Office’s Terrorism and International Narcotics Unit.  Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sam Adelsberg, Matthew Hellman, and Sidhardha Kamaraju are in charge of the prosecution, with assistance from Trial Attorneys Michael Dittoe and Lauren Goddard of the Counterterrorism Section of the Department of Justice’s National Security Division.

Click to view video. 

Tomorrow, the Nation and the world will witness an orderly and peaceful transfer of power in the United States, as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court swears in President-Elect Biden.  Throughout our Nation’s proud history, this ceremony has served as a beacon of democracy and a testament to the enduring strength of our Constitution.

By contrast, the violence we witnessed at the Capitol two weeks ago was an intolerable travesty, which is why the Justice Department has now brought charges against more than one-hundred individuals and has investigations of many others underway.

The Department of Justice is committed, together with our federal, state, and local law enforcement partners, to ensuring a safe and peaceful Inauguration – one that reflects our Nation’s enduring highest values.  

As I have repeatedly said over the last two weeks, the Justice Department will have no tolerance for anyone who attempts to mar the day with violence or other criminal conduct.  Anyone who does that will be caught, and they will be prosecuted.

Indeed, over the past two weeks, we have seen friends, family members, co-workers, and others reporting information to us about those who were involved in the breach of the Capitol on January 6th.  The FBI has received nearly 200,000 digital tips from the public.  The American people have demonstrated that they will not allow mob violence to go unanswered.  Violence and senseless criminal conduct are not the right way to resolve differences or promote change in our country.

So, rest assured that every level of law enforcement and the National Guard are working around the clock here in Washington, D.C., to provide safety and security for Inauguration Day, and that federal, state, and local law enforcement all around the country are doing the same in our state capitols and government buildings across all fifty states.

As Americans, we all should seek to have a safe and peaceful Inauguration Day, and if we hold fast to our country’s Constitution and traditions, we will.

WASHINGTON – The Department of Justice announced today that it will participate in the Computational Antitrust project, hosted by the Stanford University CodeX Center and created by Professor Thibault Schrepel.  The project brings together academics from law, computer science, and economics as well as developers, policymakers, and antitrust agencies from around the world to discuss how technology and automation can improve antitrust enforcement.

“There are important debates happening today about how we should enforce the antitrust laws, but everyone agrees that enforcement agencies should make decisions using the best tools available,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Antitrust Division.  “We look forward to being part of this valuable dialog about antitrust enforcement.”

As part of the Computational Antitrust project, representatives from the Antitrust Division will participate in regular workshops and dialogs about how to integrate cutting-edge computational developments into antitrust law and policy.  The Antitrust Division’s initial representatives will be David Lawrence, Chief of the Competition Policy and Advocacy Section, and Eric Dunn, an attorney in that section.  The project’s focus is described in further detail in a recent paper by Professor Schrepel.

The division’s participation in the Computational Antitrust project builds on several other initiatives announced last year to increase the division’s capabilities and engagement in emerging technologies relevant to antitrust enforcement.  For example, the division has offered attorneys and staff the opportunity to take coursework focused on blockchain, artificial intelligence and Machine Learning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management, and last year held a Public Workshop on Venture Capital and Antitrust, which was co-hosted with Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business and Stanford Law School.  Together, these efforts reflect a commitment to ensuring that the division remains at the leading edge of antitrust enforcement.

To learn more about the Computational Antitrust project and other participating agencies, please visit the project’s website.

A former senior New York construction official was sentenced to 38 months  in prison today for tax evasion, announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division.

According to court documents, for more than eight years, Anthony Guzzone attempted to evade his federal income taxes.  Guzzone, the former Director of Global Construction at Bloomberg LP in New York, failed to report to the IRS over $1.45 million in bribes he received from subcontractors performing work at Bloomberg construction jobs.  Guzzone, together with other Bloomberg managers and officials at Turner Construction, solicited a total of over $6 million in bribes, which was typically paid to them in cash.  On other occasions, Guzzone received in-kind bribes in the form of free construction work performed on his home and tickets to expensive events like the Super Bowl. 

One Bloomberg manager involved in the scheme, Michael Campana, had subcontractors pay for the catering hall at his wedding, as well as the wedding photographer.  Campana was previously sentenced to 24 months in prison based on his failure to report the bribery income.  Based on Guzzone’s failure to report the bribe income between 2010 and 2017, he caused a tax loss to the IRS of approximately $450,000.  Two Turner Construction officials, Ronald Olson and Vito Nigro, are awaiting sentence.

In addition to a term of imprisonment, U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Liman sentenced Guzzone to three years of supervised release, and ordered him to pay $574,005 in restitution to the IRS, which comprised his outstanding taxes and interest. 

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Zuckerman commended special agents of IRS-CI as well as Assistant U.S. Attorney David Lewis for the Southern District of New York and Senior Litigation Counsel Stanley Okula of the Tax Division who prosecuted the case.

Two providers of foreign-language services, Comprehensive Language Center Inc. (CLCI), based in the Washington, D.C., area, and Berlitz Languages Inc. (Berlitz), based in New Jersey, were charged with participating in a conspiracy to defraud the United States by impeding, impairing, obstructing, and defeating competitive bidding for a multi-million dollar foreign-language training contract issued by the National Security Agency (NSA) in 2017, the Department of Justice announced today. 

“These charges reaffirm the Antitrust Division’s commitment to combating anticompetitive conduct that victimizes government agencies,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division.  “The actions of these companies corrupted the competitive bidding process put into place by the NSA for vital language training services.”

“The result of today’s announcement demonstrates the FBI’s enduring commitment to vigorously address allegations of all types of corruption that may obstruct or hinder the right to fair competition in the marketplace,” said Special Agent in Charge George M. Crouch Jr. of the FBI Newark Field Office.

According to the one-count felony charges filed today in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, Berlitz and CLCI participated in a conspiracy to defraud the United States by impeding, impairing, obstructing, and defeating competitive bidding for a contract to provide foreign-language training services to the NSA.  According to court documents, as part of the conspiracy, Berlitz and CLCI facilitated the submission of false and misleading bid information to the NSA.  As a result, competition was suppressed among legitimately qualified bidders for the contract, obstructing, by dishonest means, the government’s ability to benefit from a competitive bidding process.  The charged conspiracy began as early as March 2017 and continued until as late as December 2017.

The Antitrust Division also announced deferred prosecution agreements resolving the charges against Berlitz and CLCI.  Under the agreements, the companies admitted to participating in the charged conspiracy, agreed to cooperate fully with any related criminal investigation and prosecution, and agreed to maintain a compliance and ethics program designed to prevent and detect violations such as the one charged.  Pursuant to the agreements, Berlitz also agreed to pay a $147,000 criminal penalty and CLCI agreed to pay a $140,000 criminal penalty, and both companies agreed that they were jointly and severally liable to pay $56,984 in victim compensation to the NSA.

Berlitz and CLCI are each charged with a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, which carries a maximum penalty of a $500,000 fine for companies.

The charges are the result of a federal antitrust investigation into fraud and anticompetitive conduct related to foreign-language training contracts being conducted by the Antitrust Division’s New York Office, with the assistance of the FBI’s Newark, New Jersey, Field Office and the NSA Office of the Inspector General.  Anyone with information in connection with this investigation should contact the Antitrust Division’s New York Office at 212-335-8000 or visit www.justice.gov/atr/contact/newcase.html.

On Friday, the Environment and Natural Resources Division publicly distributed a memorandum summarizing important principles and priorities for environmental enforcement. The memorandum, issued Jan. 14 by outgoing Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Bossert Clark, emphasizes that robust enforcement of our nation's environmental laws remains one of the division’s highest priorities. It emphasizes that, when engaged in criminal and civil enforcement, it is important that the division continue to enhance the fair and impartial application of the law.

The memorandum collects and reflects recent policies and guidance within the division, from around the Department of Justice, and in orders from the President for the continued just implementation of these responsibilities and for ensuring due process to the citizens of the United States who must have fair notice of the laws they are expected to obey. It articulates several key enforcement priorities that the division has pursued in recent years, including a focus on clean air, clean water, and clean land; a commitment to fighting fraud and protecting taxpayer money; and an emphasis on protecting America’s workers and infrastructure.

The memorandum — along with three other new memoranda regarding (1) the proper scope of equitable mitigation, (2) new restrictions on the use of Supplemental Environmental Projects, and (3) a discussion of additional recommendations on the use of enforcement discretion — are available on the division’s webpage: https://www.justice.gov/enrd/selected-documents. 

A developer and his companies have agreed to effectuate $900,000 in compensatory mitigation, preserve undisturbed riparian areas, conduct erosion-control work on streams, and be subject to a prohibitory injunction to resolve alleged violations of the Clean Water Act (CWA) on property north of Houston, Texas, the Justice Department announced today.

“Today’s substantial settlement involving the unpermitted filling of streams and wetlands, if approved by the court, will draw to a close this long-running Clean Water Act litigation,” said Eric Grant, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.  “Today’s agreement serves the public interest in enforcement of the Clean Water Act and provides long-overdue mitigation for these alleged violations.”

The case stems from activities Thomas Lipar conducted to create the Benders Landing Estates housing development on property containing streams and wetlands that feed into Spring Creek and the West Fork of the San Jacinto River, which, in turn, flow into Lake Houston. 

Beginning in 2005, the defendants operated earthmoving machinery and filled substantial segments of streams and acres of abutting wetlands.  Despite receiving information about the aquatic condition of the property, Lipar did not seek a CWA dredge-or-fill permit.  The settlement agreement reached today secures significant mitigation for these alleged violations, while providing fairness for developers who comply with the applicable laws.

The case is styled United States v. Lipar, No. 4:10-cv-01904 (S.D. Tex.).  The proposed consent decree, lodged in the U.S. District Court in Houston, is subject to a 30-day comment period and final court approval.  A copy of the proposed consent decree is available on the Justice Department website at https://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees.

A California agricultural developer has agreed to pay a civil penalty, preserve streams and wetlands, effect mitigation, and be subject to a prohibitory injunction to resolve alleged violations of the Clean Water Act (CWA) on property near the Sacramento River located in Tehama County, California, the Justice Department announced today. 

Roger J. LaPant Jr. purchased the property in this case in 2011 and sold it in 2012 to Duarte Nursery Inc. which, in turn, sold it that same year to Goose Pond Ag Inc.  Goose Pond’s activities on the property were the subject of a settlement announced by the Justice Department in September 2018 and approved by a federal judge in June 2019.  Duarte’s activities on an adjoining site were the subject of a settlement agreement announced by the Justice Department in August 2017 and approved by a federal judge in December 2017. 

“Today’s settlement involving the unpermitted filling of streams and wetlands, if approved by the court, will conclude the long-running Clean Water Act litigation involving these properties near the Sacramento River in Tehama County,” said Jonathan D. Brightbill, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.  “None of these defendants had traditionally farmed these lands, but instead attempted to profit commercially by acquiring and converting them to new uses in violation of the law.  Like the Goose Pond settlement and decree entered in 2019 and the Duarte settlement and decree entered in 2017, today’s agreement serves the public interest in enforcement of the Clean Water Act and deterrence of future violations.”

“The Corps is pleased this longstanding enforcement action has been brought to a close,” said Michael Jewell, the Chief of the Regulatory Division for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Sacramento District.  “Unlike most farmers in California’s Central Valley, Mr. LaPant conducted activities that were not lawful under the Clean Water Act.  Had he heeded the words of his consultant or discussed his plans with my office in advance, the enforcement action could have been avoided.  The Corps is always willing to talk to the public about the Regulatory Program and to provide information on jurisdiction, permit requirements, and any other aspects of the Program.”

LaPant has agreed to pay $250,000 in civil penalties; purchase $100,000 worth of compensatory mitigation credits; dedicate another 10 credits at a vernal pool conservation bank; effect long-term preservation streams, wetlands, and buffer areas on two sites with a total acreage of over 400 acres; and be subject to a prohibition on certain new activities in waters or wetlands absent pre-clearance from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  In total, the approximate cost of LaPant’s obligations under the settlement is $1.2 million.

This case stems from agricultural development activities LaPant conducted during his brief ownership of the property, which prior to his ownership had laid fallow and unfarmed for more than 20 years.  LaPant bought the 1,500-acre property for $1.9 million and sold it less than a year later for $5.6 million.  In between those transactions, evidence shows that LaPant operated earthmoving equipment through at least 900 acres of the property, including directly through streams and wetlands.  The machinery included the dragging of metal shanks through the ground to break up or pierce highly compacted, impermeable or slowly permeable surface layers, or other similar kinds of restrictive soil layers.  LaPant’s conduct in this case, part of an effort to convert the property to orchard use, contributed to the destruction or significant degradation of streams and wetlands at the site.

Even before LaPant purchased the site, he received information that alerted him to the presence of federally protected streams and wetlands on the property.  Despite that information, he conducted earthmoving activities in streams and wetlands without a CWA dredge-or-fill permit.  The settlement agreement reached today secures a significant penalty and mitigation for these violations, while providing fairness for agricultural developers who comply with the applicable laws.

The case is styled United States v. LaPant, No. 2:16-cv-01498-KJM-DB (E.D. Cal.).  The proposed consent decree, lodged in the U.S. District Court in Sacramento, is subject to a 30-day comment period and final court approval.  A copy of the proposed consent decree is available on the Justice Department website at https://www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees.

A federal court in Ohio issued a temporary restraining order enjoining a Toledo, Ohio, pharmacy and two of its pharmacists from dispensing opioids and other controlled substances, the Department of Justice announced today.

In a civil complaint filed Jan. 6, 2021, and unsealed Jan. 14, 2021, in the Northern District of Ohio, the United States alleges that Shaffer Pharmacy, its pharmacist owner Thomas Tadsen, and pharmacist Wilson Bunton repeatedly dispensed opioids and other controlled substances in violation of the Controlled Substances Act. The complaint alleges that over a period of several years, the defendants dispensed highly addictive and highly abused prescription opioids while ignoring “red flags” — that is, obvious indications of drug diversion and drug-seeking behavior. U.S. District Judge Jack Zouhary granted the government’s request for a temporary restraining order, which was filed along with the complaint.

“Federal law requires pharmacists to ensure that the controlled substance prescriptions they fill are medically legitimate,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jennifer B. Dickey of the Justice Department's Civil Division. “The Department of Justice will continue to work with DEA and our law enforcement partners to combat the opioid crisis by holding accountable pharmacies that abandon their obligations.”

“The illegal prescribing or dispensing of narcotics by medical personnel only serves to further worsen the opioid epidemic in northern Ohio and increase the number of overdose deaths in our community,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Bridget M. Brennan for the Northern District of Ohio. “Allegations of prescription misuse continue to be a priority for this office, and offenders should expect significant consequences.”

“Dispensing controlled substances is a privilege that requires abiding by the law,” said Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Special Agent in Charge Keith Martin. “DEA is committed to ensuring that those who have pledged to follow our nation’s drug laws are living up to that responsibility.”

“We continue to face an uphill battle against drug abuse and addiction, and it is unthinkable that a licensed provider would contribute to this growing epidemic,” said Special Agent in Charge Eric B. Smith of the FBI, Cleveland Division. “Restraining the ability of these defendants to continue filling prescriptions without medical necessity is a significant step. The FBI will continue efforts to identify and hold accountable any medical professional that violates their legal obligation to do no harm when they engage in criminal misconduct."

The complaint alleges that the defendants failed to take steps required to resolve red flags and ensure the legitimacy of prescriptions before filling them. According to court documents, the prescriptions dispensed by the defendants often involved highly abused opioid painkillers such as oxycodone, hydrocodone, oxymorphone, buprenorphine, and fentanyl, often in dangerous combination with other prescription drugs such as benzodiazepines (i.e., sedatives indicated for the treatment of anxiety, such as Xanax), and muscle relaxants (e.g., carisoprodol, also known by its brand name, Soma). The complaint seeks civil penalties as well as a permanent injunction against the defendants.   

The claims made in the complaint are merely allegations that the United States must prove if the case proceeds to trial.

The United States is represented by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Patricia Fitzgerald and Angelita Cruz Bridges for the Northern District of Ohio, and Trial Attorneys Scott Dahlquist and Maryann McGuire of the Justice Department’s Consumer Protection Branch. This investigation is being conducted by the DEA, FBI, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General, the State of Ohio Board of Pharmacy, the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation, and the Ohio Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit.

A federal court permanently enjoined a Sunnyside, Washington, company from preparing, processing, and distributing adulterated juice and other food products, the Department of Justice announced today.

In a complaint filed on Nov. 6, 2020, at the request of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the United States alleged that Valley Processing Inc., along with the company’s owner and president, Mary Ann Bliesner, violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) by distributing adulterated apple, pear, and grape juice products. The company formerly supplied millions of juice servings used in school lunch programs. The complaint alleged that the defendants processed juice under grossly insanitary conditions, failed to adhere to relevant food safety standards, and distributed to the public newer juice mixed with older, potentially contaminated juice.

“Americans must be confident that the food they and their families consume is safe,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jennifer B. Dickey of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “We will continue to work with our partners at FDA to stop companies from taking shortcuts at the expense of safety.”

“The purity and security of harvested and processed foods are matters of paramount importance to our citizen consumers, particularly during unsettled times,” said U.S. Attorney William Hyslop for the Eastern District of Washington. “The Justice Department and our FDA partners work hard to ensure compliance with food processing safety and purity standards. We support these efforts which are essential to promoting confidence in Washington’s and our nation’s food sources.”

“Food processors who do not comply with FDA regulations can put consumers’ health and well-being in danger. With this consent decree, we’re taking action to protect Americans, including children in this case, from consuming foods that have been processed in violation of the law,” said Judy McMeekin, Pharm.D., FDA’s Associate Commissioner for Regulatory Affairs. “The FDA is fully committed to taking appropriate measures against those who disregard food safety standards and distribute adulterated food to the public.”

According to the complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, FDA inspections revealed that the defendants’ juice products contained inorganic arsenic and patulin — toxins that can pose health risks to consumers. FDA found that the defendants did not analyze or investigate data from their raw fruit suppliers, as required by law, to determine the origin of these food hazards. The complaint also alleged that Valley Processing stored grape juice concentrate that was several years old outside in covered barrels. The complaint alleged that samples of the old juice concentrate were found to be contaminated with filth and mold, yet defendants combined the older juice with newer lots and distributed the mixture to consumers and schools. The complaint alleged that the defendants promised to stop using the old juice, but a subsequent 2019 FDA inspection showed the defendants continued to blend the older juice with newer juice.  

The defendants agreed to settle the suit and be bound by a consent decree of permanent injunction. The order entered by the district court permanently enjoins the defendants from violating the FDCA and requires that they destroy any food, including any juice products, still in their possession. As part of the settlement, defendants represented that they are no longer engaged in processing, preparing, packing, or distributing any type of food. Before processing or distributing any food in the future, the defendants first must notify FDA in advance, comply with specific remedial measures set forth in the injunction, and permit FDA to inspect their facilities and procedures.

This matter was handled by Trial Attorney Kendrack D. Lewis of the Consumer Protection Branch in the Department of Justice’s Civil Division, with the assistance of Senior Counsel Tara Boland of the FDA’s Office of the Chief Counsel and Assistant U.S. Attorney Tim M. Durkin of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Washington.

For more information about the Consumer Protection Branch and its enforcement efforts, visit its website at https://www.justice.gov/civil/consumer-protection-branch. For more information about the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Washington, visit its website at https://www.justice.gov/usao-edwa.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that on Jan. 11, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed both the conviction and 27-month prison sentence of Murray Rojas, age, 54, of Grantville, Pennsylvania. That sentence was imposed by Senior U.S. District Court Judge Sylvia H. Rambo on May 6, 2019, after Rojas was convicted by a jury on multiple counts of causing prescription animal drugs to become misbranded in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), as well as conspiracy to commit misbranding.

According to Acting U.S. Attorney Bruce D. Brandler, between 2002 and 2014, Rojas directed veterinarians to administer drugs to horses at Penn National Racetrack on race day in violation of track rules and state law. Rojas argued on appeal that the District Court failed to properly instruct the jury on the distinction between the terms “administer” and “dispense,” as used in the FDCA, as it pertained to Rojas directing vets to inject animal drugs into her horses on race day. The Court of Appeals disagreed and found that Congress intended the term “dispense” to include situations in which a veterinarian personally administers a drug, and that Rojas caused that unlawful dispensing when she ordered the veterinarians to inject the horses. The Court of Appeals also held that the government presented sufficient evidence at trial that Penn National veterinarians dispensed prohibited drugs when they injected Rojas’s horses within 24 hours of post time at Rojas’s direction, and that Rojas herself also injected the prohibited drugs into her horses within 24 hours of post time, all in violation of the FDCA.

The Court of Appeals also rejected Rojas’ claim that Judge Rambo erred in excluding evidence that the drugs given to the horses were for therapeutic purposes and were not performance enhancing drugs. The Court of Appeals held that Pennsylvania’s horse racing regulations prohibit administering almost all drugs to horses within 24 hours of post time and the regulations do not distinguish between therapeutic and performance-enhancing drugs.

Finally, the Court of Appeals upheld Judge Rambo’s sentencing Rojas for felony, rather than misdemeanor, misbranding violations. The Court of Appeals found that Rojas acted with the requisite intent to defraud or mislead, which is a requirement for a felony misbranding conviction.

The case was investigated by the by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture’s Horse Racing Commission and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Office of Criminal Investigations. The government was represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney William Behe, Assistant Director John Claud of the Justice Department's Consumer Protection Branch, and Senior Counsel Laura Pawloski of the FDA’s Office of Chief Counsel.

न्याय विभाग (डिपार्टमेंट ऑफ जस्टिस) ने आज घोषणा की कि वह डलस, टैक्सस में स्थित एक स्टाफ़िंग कम्पनी, National Systems America, LP (नेशनल सिस्टम्स अमेरिका, एलपी) के साथ एक समझौते पर पहुंचा है।  यह समझौता विभाग के इस दावे का समाधान करता है कि नेशनल सिस्टम्स ने आप्रवासन और राष्ट्रीयता अधिनियम (INA) का उल्लंघन किया है जब उसने (1) कुछ पदों के लिए आवेदकों पर नागरिकता संबंधी गैरकानूनी प्रतिबंध लगाए थे और (2) अमेरिकी नागरिक के लिए नहीं, लेकिन आवेदकों के वैध स्थायी निवासी होने पर नौकरी के लिए और आगे विचार किए जाने के लिए एक विशिष्ट कार्य प्राधिकरण दस्तावेज़ प्रदान करने को आवश्यक बनाया था।

नागरिक अधिकार प्रभाग के कार्यकारी सहायक अटार्नी जनरल जॉन बी. डौकस ने कहा कि, “प्रतिस्पर्धात्मक और तेजी से बदलते आईटी स्टाफ़िंग उद्योग में, स्टाफ़िंग कम्पनियों के लिए यह महत्वपूर्ण है कि नागरिकता के आधार पर नौकरी पर रखे जाने संबंधी गैरकानूनी प्रतिबंध न लगाएं।”  “नियोक्ता नौकरी के प्रस्ताव को स्वीकार किए जाने से पहले कार्य करने के प्राधिकरण के सबूत पेश किए जाने की मांग नहीं कर सकते और उनका संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका में काम करने के लिए प्राधिकरण को साबित करने के लिए स्वीकार्य कार्य प्राधिकरण दस्तावेज़ों को प्रस्तुत करने के कर्मचारी के कानूनी अधिकार के साथ हस्तक्षेप न करना ज़रूरी है।

इस जांच के आधार पर, डिपार्टमेंट ने यह निष्कर्ष निकाला कि नेशनल सिस्टम्स ने अपने ग्राहकों की प्राथमिकताओं के बारे में पूर्वानुमानों के आधार पर, इस बात की परवाह किए बिना कि ऐसा करने का कोई कानूनी औचित्य था या नहीं, केवल अमेरिकी-नागरिकों को नौकरी पर रखने संबंधी प्रतिबंध लागू किए।   डिपार्टमेंट ने यह भी निष्कर्ष निकाला कि जब नेशनल सिस्टम्स गैर-अमेरिकी आवेदकों पर विचार करने का इच्छुक था, जैसे कि वैध स्थायी निवासी, तो कम्पनी ने चुनाव प्रक्रिया के अगले चरण में आगे भेजने से पहले उन्हें कार्य प्राधिकरण संबंधी विशिष्ट दस्तावेज़ दिखाने को ज़रूरी बनाकर उनके खिलाफ़ भेदभावपूर्ण व्यवहार किया।  

आम भाषा में, INA नियोक्ताओं को किसी नौकरी के लिए केवल अमेरिकी नागरिकों पर विचार किए जाने को सीमित करने की इजाज़त देता है, जबकि ऐसा करना किसी कानून, विनियम, सरकारी अनुबंध या किसी कार्यकारी आदेश के तहत आवश्यक हो; लेकिन ऐसा करना केवल ग्राहक की भेदभावपूर्ण प्राथमिकता या ग्राहक की प्राथमिकता के पूर्वानुमान पर आधारित न हो।  साथ ही INA नियोक्ताओं को कर्मचारियों की नागरिकता, आप्रवासन स्थिति या राष्ट्रीय मूल के आधार पर कार्य प्राधिकरण साबित करने के लिए अधिक या अलग-अलग दस्तावेज़ प्रदान करने का अनुरोध करने की भी मनाही करता है। इसकी बजाय, INA में, कांग्रेस ने निर्धारित किया कि सभी कार्य के लिए प्राधिकृत व्यक्ति, चाहे उनकी नागरिकता स्थिति कोई भी क्यों न हो, इस बात का चुनाव कर सकते हैं कि वे संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका में काम करने के लिए प्राधिकरण को साबित करने के लिए कौन से कानूनी तौर पर स्वीकार्य दस्तावेज़ प्रदान करना चाहते हैं।  हालांकि, INA नियोक्ताओं को असली न लगने वाले दस्तावेज़ों को अस्वीकृत करने की इजाज़त देता है। अंत में, INA नियोक्ता को किसी व्यक्ति के नौकरी के प्रस्ताव को स्वीकार करने से पहले उसके काम करने के प्राधिकरण की पुष्टि करने की इजाज़त नहीं देता है।

समझौते के अनुबंध के तहत, नेशनल सिस्टम्स संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका को नागरिक जुर्माने के तौर पर $34,200 का भुगतान करेगा, अपने कर्मचारियों को INA की भेदभाव के खिलाफ प्रावधानों की आवश्यकताओं का प्रशिक्षण प्रदान करेगा, और कानून के मुताबिक भविष्य के अनुपालन को सुनिश्चित करने के लिए अपनी नीतियों में बदलाव करेगा।

नागरिक अधिकार प्रभाग के आप्रवासन और कर्मचारियों के अधिकार संबंधी अनुभाग (IER) INA के भेदभाव के खिलाफ प्रावधानों को लागू करने के लिए ज़िम्मेदार है।  कानून नौकरी पर नियुक्त किए जाने, नौकरी से निकाले जाने या फीस के बदले काम पर भर्ती करने या संदर्भ देने में नागरिकता स्थिति और राष्ट्रीय मूल संबंधी भेदभाव;  अनुचित दस्तावेज़ी प्रथाओं; और प्रतिशोध और धमकी को निषिद्ध करता है।  

इस संक्षिप्त वीडियो के माध्यम से IER के काम और सहायता कैसे प्राप्त की जाए, के बारे में और जानें।  आवेदक या कर्मचारी जो यह मानते हैं कि उनकी नागरिकता, आप्रवासन स्थिति, या नौकरी पर नियुक्त किए जाने, नौकरी से निकाले जाने, भर्ती किए जाने की प्रक्रिया के दौरान राष्ट्रीय मूल के आधार पर उनसे भेदभाव किया गया था या रोजगार पात्रता सत्यापन प्रक्रिया (फॉर्म I-9 और ई-सत्यापन) के दौरान भेदभाव किया गया था; या प्रतिशोध के भागी बने, वे एक आरोप दायर कर सकते हैं।  जनता भी IER की कर्मचारी हॉटलाइन से 1-800-255-7688 पर सम्पर्क कर सकती है; IER की नियोक्ता हॉटलाइन को 1-800-255-8155 (सुनने में विकार वाले लोगों के लिए 1-800-237-2515, TTY) पर कॉल कर सकती है, या  IER@usdoj.gov पर ईमेल भेज सकती है; एक मुफ़्त वेबीनार के लिए साइन-अप करें; या IER की अंग्रेज़ी और स्पैनिश वेबसाइट्स पर जाएँ।  IER से अपडेट्स प्राप्त करने के लिए GovDelivery पर सब्सक्राइब करें।

नागरिक अधिकार प्रभाग आपके नागरिक अधिकार संबंधी उल्लंघनों के बारे में जानना चाहता है।  जनता के सदस्य नागरिक अधिकार प्रभाग के रिपोर्टिंग पोर्टल के माध्यम से संभावित नागरिक अधिकारों के उल्लंघनों की रिपोर्ट कर सकते हैं।

The Department of Justice announced today that it reached a settlement with National Systems America LP (National Systems), a Dallas, Texas-based staffing agency.  

The settlement resolves the department’s claim that National Systems violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) when it (1) imposed unlawful citizenship restrictions on applicants for certain positions and (2) required lawful permanent resident applicants, but not U.S. citizens, to provide a specific work authorization document to receive further consideration for a job.

“In the competitive and fast-paced IT staffing industry, it is critical for staffing companies not to impose unlawful hiring restrictions based on citizenship,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General John B. Daukas of the Civil Rights Division.  “Employers must not request proof of work authorization before a job offer is accepted and must not interfere with a worker’s lawful right to present acceptable work authorization documents to prove authorization to work in the United States.”

Based on its investigation, the department concluded that National Systems implemented U.S. citizens-only hiring restrictions based on assumptions about its clients’ preferences, and regardless of whether there was any legal justification for doing so.  The department also concluded that even when National Systems was willing to consider non-U.S. citizen applicants, such as a lawful permanent resident, the company nevertheless discriminated against them by requiring them to show specific documentation to confirm their work authorization before it would advance them to the next stage of the selection process. 

In general, the INA allows employers to limit consideration for a job to U.S. citizens only when required by a law, regulation, government contract, or an Executive Order; not based on a client’s discriminatory preferences or assumptions about a client’s preferences.  The INA also prohibits employers from requesting more or different documents than necessary to prove work authorization based on employees’ citizenship, immigration status or national origin.  Instead, in the INA, Congress determined that all work-authorized individuals, regardless of citizenship status, may choose which valid, legally acceptable documents to present to demonstrate their ability to work in the United States.  The INA does, however, permit employers to reject non-genuine looking documents.  Finally, the INA does not permit an employer to verify an individual’s authorization to work before a job offer is accepted.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, National Systems will pay to the United States a civil penalty of $34,200, train its employees about the requirements of the INA’s anti-discrimination provision, and change its policies to ensure future compliance with the statute.

The Civil Rights Division’s Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER) is responsible for enforcing the anti-discrimination provision of the INA.  The statute prohibits citizenship status and national origin discrimination in hiring, firing, or recruitment or referral for a fee; unfair documentary practices; and retaliation and intimidation.  

Learn more about IER’s work and how to get assistance through this brief video.  Applicants or employees who believe they were discriminated against based on their citizenship, immigration status, or national origin in hiring, firing, recruitment, or during the employment eligibility verification process (Form I-9 and E-Verify); or subjected to retaliation, can file a charge.  The public also can contact IER’s worker hotline at 1-800-255-7688; call IER’s employer hotline at 1-800-255-8155 (1-800-237-2515, TTY for hearing impaired); email IER@usdoj.gov; sign up for a free webinar; or visit IER’s English and Spanish websites.  Subscribe to GovDelivery to receive updates from IER.

The Civil Rights Division wants to hear about civil rights violations.  Members of the public can report possible civil rights violations through the Civil Rights Division’s reporting portal.

The Department of Justice obtained more than $2.2 billion in settlements and judgments from civil cases involving fraud and false claims against the government in the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2020, Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Bossert Clark of the Department of Justice’s Civil Division announced today.  Recoveries since 1986, when Congress substantially strengthened the civil False Claims Act, now total more than $64 billion.

“Even in the face of a nationwide pandemic, the department’s dedicated employees continued to investigate and litigate cases involving fraud against the government and to ensure that citizens’ tax dollars are protected from abuse and are used for their intended purposes,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Clark.  “The continued success of the department’s False Claims Act enforcement efforts are a testament to the dedication of the civil servants who pursue these important cases as well as to the fortitude of whistleblowers who report fraud.”

Of the more than $2.2 billion in settlements and judgments recovered by the Department of Justice this past fiscal year, over $1.8 billion relates to matters that involved the health care industry, including drug and medical device manufacturers, managed care providers, hospitals, pharmacies, hospice organizations, laboratories, and physicians.  The amounts included in the $1.8 billion reflect only federal losses, and, in many of these cases, the department was instrumental in recovering additional tens of millions of dollars for state Medicaid programs.

In addition to combating health care fraud, the False Claims Act serves as the government’s primary civil tool to redress false claims for federal funds and property involving a multitude of other government operations and functions.  The act helps to support our military and first responders by ensuring that government contractors provide equipment that is safe, effective, and cost efficient; to safeguard American businesses and workers by promoting compliance with customs laws, trade agreements, visa requirements, and small business protections; and to protect other critical government programs ranging from the provision of disaster relief funds to nutrition benefits for needy families.

In 1986, Congress strengthened the act by increasing incentives for whistleblowers to file lawsuits alleging false claims on behalf of the government.  These whistleblower, or qui tam, actions comprise a significant percentage of the False Claims Act cases that are filed.  If the government prevails in a qui tam action, the whistleblower, also known as the relator, typically receives a portion of the recovery ranging between 15 and 30 percent.  Whistleblowers filed 672 qui tam suits in fiscal year 2020, and this past year the department recovered over $1.6 billion in these and earlier-filed suits.

Health Care Fraud

The department’s health care fraud enforcement efforts restore funds to federal programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and TRICARE, the health care program for service members and their families.  But just as important, the department’s vigorous pursuit of health care fraud prevents billions more in losses by deterring others who might otherwise try to cheat the system for their own gain.  The department investigates and resolves matters involving a wide array of health care providers, goods, and services.

The largest recoveries in the past year came from the drug industry.  For example, following years of litigation and multiple unsuccessful attempts to have the government’s claims dismissed, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation paid over $591 million to resolve claims that it paid kickbacks to doctors to induce them to prescribe its drugs.  Novartis sales representatives, on the instruction of their managers, selected high-volume prescribers to serve as paid “speakers” to induce the prescribers to write Novartis prescriptions. 

The department also continued to investigate efforts by drug manufacturers to protect high drug prices by funding the co-payments of Medicare patients.  Congress included co-pay requirements in the Medicare program, in part, to serve as a check on health care costs, including the prices that pharmaceutical manufacturers can demand for their drugs.  This year, two pharmaceutical manufacturers – Novartis and Gilead Sciences – paid a combined total of over $148 million to resolve claims that they illegally paid patient copays for their own drugs through purportedly independent foundations that the companies in fact treated as mere conduits for these payments.  In addition, four of the purportedly independent foundations paid a total of $13 million this year to resolve liability for their involvement in the kickback schemes.  In August 2020, the department sued Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and Teva Neurosciences, Inc., alleging that they conspired with two purportedly independent foundations to illegally subsidize Medicare co-pays for the drug Copaxone. 

The department continued to pursue opioid-related fraud schemes.  One of the largest opioid-related recoveries this past year was from Practice Fusion, Inc., a health information technology developer that accepted kickbacks from the opioid manufacturer Purdue Pharma in exchange for implementing clinical decision support alerts in its electronic health records (EHR) software that were designed to increase prescriptions for OxyContin, and caused its users to submit false claims for federal incentive payments by misrepresenting the capabilities of its EHR software.  In addition, the $145 million Practice Fusion settlement reflects that complex EHR-related fraud schemes remain a focus of the Department’s work. 

Kickbacks in the healthcare industry are pernicious because of their potential to subvert medical decision-making.  In addition to pursuing improper payments by drug manufacturers, the department resolved other schemes involving the willful solicitation or payment of illegal remuneration to induce the purchase of a good or service paid for by a federal health care program.  For example, ResMed Corp., a durable medical equipment manufacturer, agreed to pay more than $37 million to resolve allegations that it paid kickbacks to suppliers, sleep labs, and other health care providers.  The Oklahoma Center for Orthopaedic and Multi-Specialty Surgery, a specialty hospital in Oklahoma City, its part-owner and management company, an orthopedic physician group, and two physicians agreed to pay a total of over $72 million to resolve allegations that the hospital provided improper remuneration to the physician group in exchange for patient referrals.  UTC Laboratories Inc. (RenRX) agreed to pay $41.6 million, and its three principals agreed to pay $1 million, to resolve allegations that they paid kickbacks in exchange for laboratory referrals for pharmacogenetic testing and for furnishing and billing for tests that were not medically necessary.  

In addition to these recoveries, in March 2020, the department filed a complaint against medical device manufacturer SpineFrontier, Inc., its Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Kingsley Chin, and certain related entities and individuals, alleging that they paid kickbacks to spine surgeons in the form of sham “consulting” agreements to induce use of SpineFrontier surgical devices. 

As in years past, the department also resolved a number of matters in which providers billed federal health care programs for medically unnecessary services or services not rendered as billed.  For example, Universal Health Services paid $117 million to resolve allegations that its inpatient psychiatric hospitals and residential psychiatric and behavioral treatment facilities knowingly submitted false claims for inpatient behavioral health services that were not reasonable or medically necessary and/or failed to provide adequate and appropriate services to its patients.  Additionally, Logan Laboratories, Inc., pain clinic Tampa Pain Relief Centers, Inc., and two of their former executives agreed to pay a total of $41 million to resolve allegations that they automatically ordered both presumptive and definitive urine drug tests for all patients at every visit, without any individualized determination that either test was medically necessary for the particular patients for whom the tests were ordered.

The department also pursued health care frauds arising under government contracts, as in the case of its $1.85 million settlement with Veterans Administration contractor Sterling Medical Associates for allegedly failing to offer timely appointments to veterans and falsifying wait times at Minnesota outpatient clinics.

Procurement Fraud

In the past year, the department also pursued a variety of other fraud matters involving the government’s purchase of goods and services.  For example, major federal contractors Bechtel National Inc., Bechtel Corporation, AECOM Energy & Construction, Inc., and their joint venture Waste Treatment Completion Company, LLC agreed to pay over $57 million to resolve allegations that they submitted false claims to the U.S. Department of Energy by charging inflated labor hours and by billing for work not actually performed to construct and maintain the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant.

In another case, QuantaDyn Corporation agreed to pay $37 million to resolve both its criminal and civil liability for engaging in a bribery scheme to steer government contracts for training simulators to the company.  William T. Dunn Jr., the President and Chief Executive Officer of QuantaDyn, separately agreed to pay $500,000 to resolve his personal civil liability for the alleged scheme.

In some cases, the department pursued allegations that government contractors provided goods or services that did not comply with contract requirements.  For example, Unitrans International, Inc. agreed to pay $27 million to resolve allegations that it fraudulently induced the Army and the U.S. Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) to award wartime contracts for food and trucks by falsely certifying compliance with United States sanctions against Iran.  The agreement also resolved allegations that a company associated with Unitrans falsely represented construction progress on a warehouse to induce DLA to award the prime vendor contract to provide food to U.S. troops in Afghanistan.  In another matter, Bradken Inc., a subsidiary of Hitachi Construction Machinery and a leading supplier of high-yield steel for naval submarines, paid over $10 million to resolve allegations that it produced and sold substandard steel components for installation on U.S. Navy submarines.  The government alleged that Bradken produced castings that failed lab tests and did not meet the Navy’s standards, and that its Director of Metallurgy falsified test results to hide the failures.

SK Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., one of the largest engineering firms in South Korea, paid $7.8 million to settle False Claims Act claims arising out of a fraudulent scheme to obtain a large U.S. Army construction contract in South Korea by paying millions of dollars to an Army contracting official through a fake Korean construction company.  The firm also entered into a plea agreement with the United States and paid over $60 million in criminal fines for the same misconduct.

Other Fraud Recoveries

The number and variety of judgments and settlements announced during fiscal year 2020 reflect the diversity of fraud recoveries arising under the False Claims Act.  For example, Hybrid Tech Holdings LLC, Hybrid Technology LLC, and Ace Strength International LTD, agreed to pay $29 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act by colluding to rig the bidding of an auction to purchase a non-performing loan from the U.S. Department of Energy.

This year, three states paid a total of over $24 million to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act in their administration of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), previously known as the Food Stamp Program.  Although the federal government funds SNAP benefits, it relies on the states to determine whether applicants are eligible for benefits, to administer those benefits, and to perform quality control to ensure that eligibility decisions are accurate.  The settlements resolved allegations that the states submitted false quality control data and information to the U.S. Department of Agriculture for which they received performance bonuses to which they were not entitled.

The department pursued fraud in connection with Public Assistance program funds that FEMA provided to institutional applicants, such as schools and universities, for the replacement of facilities damaged by Hurricane Katrina.  For example, Xavier University of Louisiana agreed to pay $12 million to resolve allegations that it received excess disaster assistance funds that substantially exceeded the amounts it was entitled to receive under program rules.  The settlement with Xavier was based on false and misleading repair estimates that were submitted on its behalf by AECOM and certain affiliates, which received more than $300 million from FEMA between 2005 and 2019 to serve as technical assistance contractors in support of FEMA’s disaster response efforts.  In July 2020, the department filed a complaint against AECOM and its affiliates for their role in the alleged scheme.   

Linde GmbH, a multinational corporation that imports materials into the United States to build natural gas and chemical manufacturing plants, and its U.S. subsidiary, the importer of record, agreed to pay more than $22 million to resolve allegations that they knowingly made false statements on customs declarations to avoid paying duties owed on the companies’ imports, including in some instances antidumping and countervailing duties.  Linde and its subsidiary allegedly misrepresented the nature, classification, and valuation of imported merchandise, as well as the applicability of free trade agreements. 

The Scripps Research Institute agreed to pay $10 million to settle claims that it improperly charged NIH-funded research grants for time spent by researchers on non-grant related activities such as developing, preparing, and writing new grant applications, teaching, and engaging in other administrative activities.

Lakeway Regional Medical Center LLC agreed to pay $13.5 million to resolve allegations that it improperly obtained Federal Housing Administration insurance for a mortgage to develop a Texas hospital and used loan funds in violation of FHA requirements.  Five other individuals and entities involved in the development project paid an additional $1.8 million for their part in the alleged scheme.

Holding Individuals Accountable

The department continued its commitment to use the False Claims Act and other civil remedies to deter and redress fraud by individuals as well as corporations.  A number of corporate settlements required individuals, particularly senior executives or owners, to pay a portion of the settlement amount, as noted above.  The following are additional examples of recoveries involving individuals.

Following a $260 million settlement with Health Management Associates, the department negotiated a $4.25 million civil settlement with Glenn A. Kline, D.O. and his surgical practice, Community Surgical Associates, to resolve civil allegations relating to illegal kickbacks received from two hospitals formerly operated by HMA.  To secure Dr. Kline’s referrals, HMA allegedly paid Dr. Kline in excess of the fair market value of his services and paid additional amounts to benefit his practice, Community Surgical Associates.  These funding arrangements were allegedly structured to disguise payments that were, in actuality, payments for patient referrals rather than for legitimate services.

In connection with the department’s litigation against SpineFrontier, six orthopedic surgeons agreed to pay a total of over $3.25 million to resolve allegations that they accepted kickbacks in the form of sham consulting fees from SpineFrontier and a third-party entity, Impartial Medical Experts, LLC, which was owned and controlled by the company’s founder and CEO.  The consulting payments were allegedly based on the number of times the surgeons used a SpineFrontier product in a given month, as opposed to the actual time they spent consulting.  As part of the settlement agreements, each physician admitted to reporting and being paid for consulting hours in excess of actual or documented consulting time. 

In another example, Texas doctor Bibi Sattar and her medical practice paid $210,000 to resolve allegations that she accepted kickbacks in the form of sham laboratory processing and handling fees in exchange for referring laboratory tests to True Health Diagnostics, LLC.

As part of a $4.25 million settlement, five individual shareholders of Dave O’Mara Contractor, Inc. (DOCI), an Indiana-based asphalt contractor, agreed to pay a total of nearly $2 million to resolve the United States’ allegations that DOCI violated the False Claims Act by misrepresenting to the government the materials that were used to pave federally funded roads in the state of Indiana.  Specifically, the government alleged that DOCI claimed that its hot mix asphalt mixture contained a sufficient amount of binder or glue to hold the mix together when, in fact, DOCI frequently failed to meet the minimal levels of binder required to properly pave the roads.

Recoveries in Whistleblower Suits

Of the $2.2 billion in settlements and judgments reported by the government in fiscal year 2020, over $1.6 billion arose from lawsuits filed under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act.  During the same period, the government paid out $309 million to the individuals who exposed fraud and false claims by filing these actions.

The number of lawsuits filed under the qui tam provisions of the Act has grown significantly since 1986, with 672 qui tam suits filed this past year – an average of nearly 13 new cases every week.

“Whistleblowers with insider information are critical to identifying and pursuing new and evolving fraud schemes that might otherwise remain undetected,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Clark.  “These individuals often make substantial sacrifices to bring these schemes to light, and our efforts to protect taxpayer funds continue to benefit from their actions.”

In 1986, Senator Charles Grassley and Representative Howard Berman led the successful efforts in Congress to amend the False Claims Act to, among other things, encourage whistleblowers to come forward with allegations of fraud.  In 2009 and 2010, further improvements were made to the False Claims Act and its whistleblower provisions. 

Pending Recoveries

The $2.2 billion in recoveries announced today do not include settlements totaling billions of additional dollars that are not yet final or did not become final before the end of the fiscal year.  On Oct. 21, 2020, the department reached a resolution with Purdue Pharma that provides the United States with an allowed, unsubordinated, general unsecured bankruptcy claim of $2.8 billion to resolve allegations that Purdue caused false claims to be submitted to federal health care programs arising from its conduct in promoting and unlawfully inducing prescriptions of opioids.  The settlement remains contingent on the inclusion of certain conditions in a chapter 11 plan of reorganization.  Under a separate civil settlement, individual members of the Sackler family agreed to pay the United States $225 million arising from their alleged conduct in intensifying marketing efforts directed toward extreme, high-volume prescribers.

The department also concluded a multi-year investigation of Indivior plc related to its marketing of the opioid addiction treatment drug Suboxone.  In July 2020, Indivior agreed to pay a total of $600 million, of which $300 million was paid to resolve civil allegations that Indivior promoted Suboxone to physicians who were writing prescriptions for uses that were unsafe, ineffective, and medically unnecessary and used false and misleading claims that it was less susceptible to diversion, abuse, and accidental pediatric exposure than other buprenorphine products.  The global resolution was conditioned on the district court’s acceptance of Indivior’s criminal plea, which occurred in November 2020.

While these resolutions are not included in the total recoveries for fiscal year 2020, they are notable because they reflect significant work over the last year on opioid matters, one of the department’s key priorities.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Clark expressed appreciation for all the work over the past year by the many public servants who continued to support the department’s efforts to protect the public fisc:  “I am grateful to all those in the Civil Division and the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, as well as the agency Offices of Inspector General and the many other federal and state agencies who worked tirelessly, often overcoming daunting challenges, to provide substantial benefits to the taxpayers.”

****

Except where indicated, the government’s claims in the matters described above are allegations only and there has been no determination of liability.  The numbers contained in this press release may differ slightly from the original press releases due to accrued interest.

The Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division announced today that it has completed its review of the proposal by the Institute of International Finance (IIF) to promulgate voluntary guidelines, called the Principles for Debt Transparency (Principles), allowing for public disclosure of information regarding the issuance of sovereign debt. Based on the representations in IIF’s letter request, including its description of certain safeguards, the department has concluded that the Principles are unlikely to harm competition. Therefore, the department does not presently intend to challenge IIF’s proposed Principles.

“IIF’s proposed Principles will enhance transparency in the market for sovereign debt,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Department of Justice Antitrust Division. “IIF has put in place safeguards to avoid harm to competition, such as making the Principles voluntary, delaying the release of information, and grouping specific price terms (such as interest rates) into more general ranges.”

According to the department’s business review letter, IIF represents a wide constituency in the international finance industry, including approximately 450 members from 70 countries, that had input into the proposed Principles. The department’s business review letter recognizes that the current sovereign debt market often lacks transparency, which can lead to increased transaction costs and less efficient pricing. IIF’s proposed Principles attempt to remedy those issues by allowing for voluntary and delayed disclosure of some terms from the issuance of sovereign debt.

Under the department’s business review procedure, an organization may submit a proposed action to the Antitrust Division and receive a statement as to whether the department currently intends to challenge the action under the antitrust laws based on the information provided. The department reserves the right to challenge the proposed action under the antitrust laws if the actual operation of the proposed conduct proves to be anticompetitive in purpose or effect.

Copies of the business review request and the department’s response are available on the Antitrust Division’s website at https://www.justice.gov/atr/business-review-letters-and-request-letters, as well as in a file maintained by the Antitrust Documents Group of the Antitrust Division. After a 30-day waiting period, any documents supporting the business review will be added to the file, unless a basis for their exclusion for reasons of confidentiality has been established under the business review procedure. Supporting documents in the file will be maintained for a period of one year, and copies will be available upon request to the FOIA/Privacy Act Unit, Antitrust Documents Group at atrdocs.grp@usdoj.gov.

The Justice Department filed lawsuits today alleging that two obstetrician-gynecologist (OB/GYN) doctors in Bakersfield, California, refused to provide routine medical care to a patient on the basis of her HIV status, in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

“The Justice Department continues to work to end discriminatory and stigmatizing treatment of people with HIV based on unfounded fears and stereotypes,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General John Daukas for the Civil Rights Division.  “Medical providers have a legal obligation under the ADA to provide individuals with HIV equal access to healthcare services, and are in the best position to ensure all involved are adequately protected.”

The complaints, filed in the Eastern District of California, allege that Dr. Chibuike Anucha, MD, PC, and Dr. Umaima Jamaluddin, MD, in unconnected incidents, refused to provide routine OB/GYN care to a patient due to the patient’s HIV status.  According to the complaint against Dr. Jamaluddin, the doctor refused to allow the patient to make an appointment for preventative care, including a Pap smear, when she learned of the patient’s HIV status during intake.  According to the complaint against Dr. Anucha, the doctor, during a consultation for uterine fibroids, told the patient that she needed a Pap smear, but the doctor said he would not perform it because he does not treat high-risk patients, including patients with HIV.  The lawsuit alleges that a Pap smear is a routine medical procedure, and that an individual with HIV is not high-risk for a Pap smear such that referral to a specialist would be necessary.

Title III of the ADA prohibits public accommodations, including doctors or other professional offices of health care providers, from discriminating against people with disabilities, including those with HIV.  These prohibitions include denying individuals with disabilities the ability to benefit from the public accommodation’s goods or services.

For more information on the Civil Rights Division, please visit www.justice.gov/crt.  For more information on the ADA, please call the department’s toll-free ADA Information Line at 800-514-0301 (TDD 800-514-0383) or visit www.ada.gov. The complaint for Dr. Anucha can be viewed here: https://www.ada.gov/anucha_comp.html. The complaint for Dr. Jamaluddin can be viewed here:  https://www.ada.gov/jamaluddin_comp.html.

Hagatña, Guam – SHAWN N. ANDERSON, United States Attorney for the Districts of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands, announced that defendant Jesse Mendiola Blas, age 58, from Yona, Guam, was sentenced in the United States District Court of Guam to 37 months imprisonment for Extortion Under Color of Official Right, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951.  The Court also ordered three years of supervised release following imprisonment, one hundred hours of community service, a mandatory $100 special assessment fee, and a forfeiture money judgment of $11,700.

Beginning in November 2018, Blas used his position as Mayor of Yona to accept cash bribes from a confidential informant (CI), who posed as a drug trafficker to obtain United States Postal Service cluster box units (CBU).  The CBUs are offered free to residents for the lawful receipt of mail.  Blas agreed to provide a mailbox to the CI to enable drug traffickers to securely receive packages of methamphetamine through the U.S. mail system.  Continual access to the mailbox was conditioned upon sharing proceeds from the drug packages with Blas.  During the scheme, he received $11,700 for the use of a single mailbox.  Blas also offered to sell a second mailbox to the CI for $15,000.  He also offered to change the assigned box each week to avoid interception of the drug packages by law enforcement.  When the CI stopped making payments, Blas asked for $8,000 more and threatened to shut down the mailbox.  Blas was subsequently arrested in September 2019.

U.S. Attorney Anderson stated, “We entrust our elected officials with the responsibility to act in the best interests of the public.  Community safety is among their basic duties.  This case exposed a mayor acting in his own self-interest to the potential detriment of an entire island.  I commend the hard work by our agency partners that brought Mr. Blas to justice.  The sentence imposed by the Court further demonstrates that officials who engage in criminal conduct will be held accountable.”

“Most public officials are honorable and dedicated to serving their communities. Unfortunately, the actions displayed by Mayor Blas undermines the public’s trust in elected officials," said FBI Special Agent in Charge Eli S. Miranda. “Citizens expect and deserve their public officials to serve them honestly and in accordance with the law. Failure to do so erodes the public’s faith in government – which is crucial in ensuring public safety.  The FBI will continue to aggressively investigate any corrupt public official who willfully and maliciously abuse their office.”

“As the law enforcement and security arm of the U.S. Postal Service, the safety of postal employees and the public is our top priority,” said Inspector in Charge Rafael Nunez of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service.  “Anyone who uses the Post Office or its products for unlawful activities should know they will not go undetected and will be held accountable. When local and federal law enforcement work together, we can better protect our communities, our families, and our neighborhoods.  Working together we will continue to investigation, arrest and prosecute those individuals responsible for endangering U.S. Postal Service employees and the citizens of Guam.”

 “Public corruption has far reaching effects on the day to day lives of everyone in society,” said John F. Tobon, Special Agent in Charge for Homeland Security Investigations (HSI). “Identifying acts of corruption, the proceeds of these acts and bringing those responsible to justice is a top priority for HSI.  We will continue to work tirelessly in order to root out corruption.” 

This case was a result of a joint investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Postal Inspection Service, and Homeland Security Investigations.  The case was prosecuted by Laura C. Sambataro, Assistant United States Attorney in the District of Guam.

El Departamento de Justicia anunció hoy que ha llegado a un acuerdo con National Systems America, LP (National Systems), una agencia de empleo con sede en Dallas, Tejas. El acuerdo resuelve la acusación del Departamento de que National Systems había vulnerado la ley de Inmigración y Nacionalidad (INA, por sus siglas en inglés) al (1) imponer a solicitantes de ciertos puestos restricciones ilegales relacionadas con su ciudadanía y (2) requerir a los solicitantes que eran residentes permanentes legales, pero no a los que eran ciudadanos, que presentaran un documento específico de autorización para trabajar para seguir siendo considerados para un puesto.

«En la industria competitiva y acelerada de dotación de personal informática, es fundamental que las agencias de empleo no impongan restricciones ilegales de contratación basadas en la ciudadanía», afirmó el Fiscal General Auxiliar en funciones de la División de Derechos Civiles, John B. Daukas. «Los empleadores no deben pedir pruebas de autorización para trabajar antes de que se acepte una oferta de trabajo y no deben interferir en el derecho legal del trabajador a presentar documentos aceptables de autorización para trabajar para demostrar su autorización para trabajar en los Estados Unidos».

Con base en su investigación, el Departamento concluyó que National Systems había restringido la contratación únicamente a ciudadanos de los EE. UU., basándose en suposiciones acerca de las preferencias de sus clientes e independientemente de si existían fundamentos legales para lo mismo. Por otra parte, el Departamento concluyó que incluso cuando National Systems estaba dispuesto a considerar a solicitantes que no eran ciudadanos de los EE. UU., tales como residentes permanentes legales, la agencia los discriminó de todos modos al requerir que presentaran documentación específica para confirmar su autorización para trabajar antes de pasarlos al próximo paso del proceso de selección. 

Por lo general, la INA solamente permite que los empleadores consideren exclusivamente a ciudadanos de los EE. UU. cuando así lo requiere una ley, un reglamento, un contrato gubernamental o una orden ejecutiva y no con base en las preferencias discriminatorias de un cliente o en suposiciones acerca de las preferencias de un cliente. La disposición antidiscriminatoria de la INA también prohíbe que los empleadores pidan documentos adicionales o diferentes a los que sean necesarios para demostrar la autorización para trabajar con base en el estatus migratorio o de ciudadanía del empleado o bien por su nacionalidad de origen. A su vez, en la INA, el Congreso determinó que todo individuo con autorización para trabajar, independientemente de su estatus de ciudadanía, puede elegir los documentos válidos y legalmente aceptables que desea presentar para demostrar su elegibilidad para trabajar en los Estados Unidos. No obstante, la INA sí permite que los empleadores rechacen documentos que no parecen ser genuinos.  Por último, la INA no permite que un empleador verifique la autorización para trabajar de uno antes de ofrecerle un trabajo.

Conforme a los términos del acuerdo conciliatorio, National Systems pagará a Estados Unidos una sanción civil que asciende a 34.200 $, capacitará a sus empleados en cuanto a los requisitos de la disposición antidiscriminatoria de la INA y cambiará sus políticas para garantizar su futuro cumplimiento con la ley.  

Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen attended a briefing today at the FBI’s Strategic Information and Operations Center (SIOC) on the recent attack on the Capitol building and law enforcement preparations for the upcoming presidential inauguration.  Following the briefing, he addressed the assembled law enforcement partners and thanked them for their efforts.

“Americans can be proud of the effort the men and women of the Justice Department and our federal, state, and local partners have made in the days since the attack on the Capitol building,” said Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen. “As I have said repeatedly, our efforts at investigating the wrongdoing of that day are continuing around the clock and we are fully committed to hold those who engaged in criminal acts accountable.  Simultaneously, security preparations for the presidential inauguration and peaceful transfer of power continue and we will have absolutely no tolerance whatsoever for any attempts to disrupt any aspect of the inauguration or associated events leading up to, on, and following January 20.”

During the SIOC visit, Rosen was briefed by federal, state, and local partners on specifics of the security plans for this week and next.  Following that security briefing, Mr. Rosen met with a team of FBI leaders for another update on the investigations concerning the attack on the Capitol building.

To date, approximately 80 cases have been charged and 34 individuals have been arrested for their alleged criminal conduct during the attack on the Capitol Building. The FBI has opened approximately 200 subject case files and received about 140,000 digital media tips from the public. Notably, many of the tips are coming from friends, co-workers and other acquaintances of those allegedly involved in the attack.

The Department also launched a new online service for the public and media to track defendants charged with criminal offenses related to the Capitol attack.  The link is at Investigations Regarding Violence at the Capitol (justice.gov). 

Following arrests, or surrender, defendants will appear before district court magistrate/judge where the arrest takes place, in accordance with the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and prosecution will be by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia.

The Justice Department today announced the guilty plea of Abdelhamid Al-Madioum, 24, to one count of providing material support and resources, namely personnel and services, to ISIS, a designated foreign terrorist organization.

Al-Madioum, a native of Morocco and naturalized U.S. citizen, previously had been detained overseas by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and was subsequently transferred into FBI custody and returned to Minnesota.  Al-Madioum entered his guilty plea today before Judge Ann D. Montgomery in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis, Minnesota.  A sentencing date will be scheduled at a later time.

According to the defendant’s guilty plea and documents filed with the court, on June 23, 2015, Al-Madioum and his family traveled from St. Louis Park, Minnesota, to Casablanca, Morocco, to visit their extended family.  On July 8, 2015, Al-Madioum left Morocco and traveled to Istanbul, Turkey.  There, Al-Madioum met up with members of ISIS who aided his border-crossing into Syria.  Once in Syria, the defendant joined other members of ISIS who brought him to Mosul, Iraq.

According to the defendant’s guilty plea, after Al-Madioum arrived in Mosul, he was administratively ISIS and received military training from its members.  Al-Madioum was then assigned to the Tariq Bin-Ziyad Battalion of the Abu Mutaz al-Qurashi Division of ISIS, where he served as a solider for ISIS until 2016, when he was injured conducting military activities on behalf of ISIS.  Following Al-Madioum’s injury, he remained a member of ISIS and continued to receive a stipend until his surrender to the SDF in or near Baghouz, Syria, in March of 2019.  In September of 2020, Al-Madioum was returned to Minnesota.

This case is the result of an investigation conducted by the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew R. Winter and Trial Attorney Danielle S. Rosborough of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section are prosecuting the case.

On Jan. 13, 2021, President Donald J. Trump signed into law the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2020 (the “Act”), which limits the antitrust exemption available to health insurance companies under the McCarran-Ferguson Act.  The Act, sponsored by Rep. Peter DeFazio, passed the House of Representatives on Sept. 21, 2020 and passed the Senate on Dec. 22, 2020. 

“We thank the President, the Senate, and the House of Representatives for recognizing the importance of competition in American health insurance markets,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division.  “Limiting the scope of conduct exempt from the antitrust laws will strengthen the Antitrust Division’s ability to investigate and prosecute anticompetitive behavior.  Americans deserve competition in health insurance markets just as they do in any other industry.”

The McCarran-Ferguson Act exempts certain conduct that constitutes the “business of insurance” from the federal antitrust laws.  This exemption has sometimes been interpreted by courts to allow a range of harmful anticompetitive conduct in health insurance markets.  The Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act amends the McCarran-Ferguson Act and will assist the Antitrust Division in its mission to enforce the antitrust laws by narrowing this defense and clarifying that, except for certain activities that improve health insurance services for consumers, the conduct of health insurers is subject to the federal antitrust laws.  

The Justice Department has a track record of successfully enforcing the antitrust laws against health insurers.  Over the past five years, for instance, the department has enforced the antitrust laws against health insurers involved in transactions valued at over 160 billion dollars.  The Act will help the department build upon those successes by requiring health insurers to play by the same rules as competitors in other industries.  It will end distracting arguments about when health insurers qualify for the McCarran-Ferguson exemption, and it will enable the Antitrust Division to spend resources more efficiently to achieve results that make a difference for American consumers. 

The Justice Department announced today that it reached a settlement with Collabera, Inc., a Basking Ridge, New Jersey-based information technology (IT) staffing agency.  The settlement resolves the department’s claims that Collabera violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) when it discriminated against work-authorized non-U.S. citizens.  

“IT staffing companies and their end clients must not impose unlawful barriers to employment on non-U.S. citizens who have legal  authorization to work in the United States,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General John B. Daukas of the Civil Rights Division.  “We look forward to working with Collabera to ensure compliance with the anti-discrimination provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act.”  

Based on its investigation, the department concluded that Collabera implemented a discriminatory applicant screening process in which its recruiters refused to pass on to clients non-U.S. citizens who held permanent work authorization unless they could provide an unexpired immigration document.  The department also concluded that on at least 39 occasions Collabera required non-U.S. citizens to present specific documentation to prove their work authorization because of their citizenship.  The INA prohibits employers from requesting more or different documents than necessary to prove work authorization based on employees’ citizenship, immigration status or national origin.  Instead, in the INA, Congress determined that all work-authorized individuals, regardless of citizenship status, may choose which valid, legally acceptable documents to present to demonstrate their ability to work in the United States.  The INA does, however, permit employers to reject non-genuine looking documents.  

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Collabera will pay to the United States a civil penalty of $53,000.  Collabera will also pay $35,475.92 as back pay to an affected worker.  Additionally, Collabera will train its employees on the requirements of the INA’s anti-discrimination provision, including an IER-provided training.  

The Civil Rights Division’s Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER) is responsible for enforcing the anti-discrimination provision of the INA.  The statute prohibits citizenship status and national origin discrimination in hiring, firing, or recruitment or referral for a fee; unfair documentary practices; and retaliation and intimidation.  

Learn more about IER’s work and how to get assistance through this brief video.  Applicants or employees who believe they were discriminated against based on their citizenship, immigration status, or national origin in hiring, firing, recruitment, or during the employment eligibility verification process (Form I-9 and E-Verify); or subjected to retaliation, can file a charge.  The public also can contact IER’s worker hotline at 1-800-255-7688; call IER’s employer hotline at 1-800-255-8155 (1-800-237-2515, TTY for hearing impaired); email IER@usdoj.gov; sign up for a free webinar; or visit IER’s English and Spanish websites.  Subscribe to GovDelivery to receive updates from IER.

The Civil Rights Division wants to hear about civil rights violations.  Members of the public can report possible civil rights violations through the Civil Rights Division’s reporting portal.

Today, the Justice Department published a statement on the 2016 President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) Report, Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods.  The statement is a response to PCAST’s claims regarding what it described as forensic “feature comparison methods.”

Published in September 2016, the PCAST report has been cited by several courts that have recently limited the scope of opinion testimony by firearms and toolmarks examiners regarding the source of a bullet or shell casing.  These courts relied on certain aspects of the PCAST Report to support their decisions.  In its Report, PCAST claimed that forensic “feature comparison” methods belong to the scientific discipline of metrology (measurement science); that feature comparison methods can only be deemed “foundationally valid” by adhering to PCAST’s mandatory and non-severable set of experimental design criteria; and that error rates for feature comparison methods can only be established using these “appropriately designed” black box studies.

The Department disagrees with these claims and explains why they are erroneous. Specifically, it is the Department’s position that:  

• Traditional forensic pattern examination methods—as currently practiced—do not belong to the scientific discipline of metrology. Forensic examiners visually compare the individual features observed in two examined samples, they do not measure The result of this comparison is a conclusion that is stated in words (nominal terms), not magnitudes (measurements).
• PCAST’s claim that forensic pattern examination methods can only be validated using its non-severable set of nine experimental design criteria is inconsistent with its own examples, international laboratory standards, and authorities in experimental design. There is no single scientifically recognized means by which to validate a scientific method.
• Casework error rates cannot be established through the exclusive and non-severable application of PCAST’s experimental design criteria. No single error rate is applicable to all labs, examiners, or cases.

The full statement can be found here: U.S. Department of Justice Statement on the PCAST Report: Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods and a link to the abstract can be found here: U.S. Department of Justice Statement on the PCAST Report: Abstract.

The Justice  Department’s Antitrust Division announced today that it has completed its review of a proposed joint patent licensing pool known as the University Technology Licensing Program (UTLP).  UTLP is a proposal by participating universities to offer licenses to their physical science patents relating to specified emerging technologies.

As part of its review, the division interviewed potential participants and considered its prior guidance on patent pools.  The department has concluded that, on balance, and based on the representations in UTLP’s letter request, the proposed joint patent licensing program is unlikely to harm competition. 

“University research is a key driver of innovation,” said Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Michael Murray for the Antitrust Division.  “In the physical science area, however, some university research may never be commercialized due to the costs associated with negotiating multiple licenses and combining the complementary university patents that may be necessary for cutting-edge implementations.  To the extent that UTLP makes it easier for universities to commercialize inventions that may be currently unlicensed and under-utilized, industry participants, university researchers, and ultimately the public can benefit.” 

Currently 15 participating universities intend to cooperate in licensing certain complementary patents through UTLP, which will be organized into curated portfolios relating to specific technology applications for autonomous vehicles, the “Internet of Things,” and “Big Data.”  The overarching goal of UTLP is to centralize the administrative costs associated with commercializing university research and help participating universities to overcome the budget, institutional relationship, and other constraints that make licensing in these areas particularly challenging for them. 

UTLP has incorporated a number of safeguards into its program to help protect competition, including admitting only non-substitutable patents, with a “safety valve” if a patent to accomplish a particular task is inadvertently included in a portfolio with another, substitutable patent.  The program also will allow potential sublicensees to choose an individual patent, a group of patents, or UTLP’s entire portfolio, thereby mitigating the risk that a licensee will be required to license more technology than it needs.  The department’s letter notes that UTLP is a mechanism that is intended to address licensing inefficiencies and institutional challenges unique to universities in the physical science context, and makes no assessment about whether this mechanism if set up in another context would have similar procompetitive benefits.

Under the Department of Justice’s business review procedure, an organization may submit a proposed action to the Antitrust Division and receive a statement as to whether the Antitrust Division currently intends to challenge the action under the antitrust laws based on the information provided.  The department’s conclusions in this business review apply only to UTLP.  They are not applicable to any other agreements or initiatives relating to patent licensing by universities or other entities.  The department reserves the right to challenge the proposed action under the antitrust laws if the actual operation of the proposed conduct proves to be anticompetitive in purpose or effect.

Copies of the business review request and the department’s response are available on the Antitrust Division’s website at https://www.justice.gov/atr/business-review-letters-and-request-letters, as well as in a file maintained by the Antitrust Documents Group of the Antitrust Division.  After a 30-day waiting period, any documents supporting the business review will be added to the file, unless a basis for their exclusion for reasons of confidentiality has been established under the business review procedure.  Supporting documents in the file will be maintained for a period of one year, and copies will be available upon request to the FOIA/Privacy Act Unit, Antitrust Documents Group at atrdocs.grp@usdoj.gov. 

FALLS CHURCH, VA – The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) today announced the release of its first interactive Policy Manual, the culmination of a multi-year project that represents the agency’s first comprehensive review of its policies. This effort involved cross-component collaboration and the dedication of many employees to identify redundancies, clarify ambiguities, eliminate surplusage, and update policies to reflect current law and practice.

"EOIR is pleased to present this comprehensive and dynamic resource," said Director McHenry. "The Policy Manual provides interested parties with swift access to all existing EOIR operational policies related to case adjudications, without the need to download separate documents. It also contains the first Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer Practice Manual. I am confident the Manual will prove to be a helpful resource for both internal and external stakeholders."

The Policy Manual provides stakeholders with access to all of EOIR’s policies in a single resource, and includes the Immigration Court and Board of Immigration Appeals Practice Manuals, the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer Practice Manual, and all current agency policy memoranda.

The Policy Manual will be regularly updated, and the most current version of the Manual is available through EOIR’s website.

— EOIR —

The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) is an agency within the Department of Justice. EOIR’s mission is to adjudicate immigration cases by fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly interpreting and administering the Nation’s immigration laws. Under delegated authority from the Attorney General, EOIR conducts immigration court proceedings, appellate reviews, and administrative hearings. EOIR is committed to ensuring fairness in all cases it adjudicates

Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen delivered the following video statement on the Seizure of the U.S. Capitol:

"One week ago, our Nation collectively watched in horror as a violent mob stormed the Capitol grounds, broke down crowd control barriers, assaulted Capitol Police Officers, and overran the Capitol complex.  Lives were lost.  The storming of the Capitol was an intolerable, shocking, and tragic episode in our Nation’s history.

"I am grateful, however, that order was restored at the Capitol and the Congress was able to fulfill its duties under the U.S. Constitution.  That afternoon,  from the Justice Department, more than five hundred law enforcement officers and agents from the FBI, ATF and the U.S. Marshals rushed to the Capitol.  As I watched the events unfolding, I spoke multiple times with DOJ personnel who were onsite, and coordinated with my counterparts across the government.  I also heard from Leaders of both the House and Senate.  

"In addition, our agents worked with the Capitol police and the Metropolitan police, as well as the other federal, state and local officers who responded on that day to do several things: to neutralize improvised explosive devices (or IEDs), to clear the mob from the Capitol, to search every office for explosives and other dangers, and to return the Chambers to Congress so that they could discharge their duties.

"When Congress then completed its job of certifying the electors, our job at the Justice Department to hold the intruders accountable under the law was just getting started.  Some charges were brought the very next day.  Those efforts remain active today and will continue on until justice is done.

"In the last week, more than 70 individuals have been criminally charged; we have opened more than 170 investigations; the FBI has gathered more than 100,000 digital tips from the public; and there is a lot more to come.  The wrongdoers will be held responsible.

"As we look ahead, we are also aware of other planned protests in and around the upcoming Inauguration.  The Department of Justice fully supports, and will protect, the exercise of constitutional rights.  But I want to send a clear message to anyone contemplating violence, threats of violence, or other criminal conduct:  

"We will have no tolerance whatsoever for any attempts to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power on January 20th that our Constitution calls for.  We will have no tolerance for any attempts to forcefully occupy government buildings.  

"There is no excuse for violence, vandalism, or any other form of lawlessness.

"To the American public, I ask that, if you are aware of any criminal activity or violent acts being planned, please share what you know with law enforcement or the FBI.  

"Along with our other federal partners and local authorities, we will spare no resources in protecting public safety in the coming days.  And everyone should understand one key thing:  the Department of Justice will seek to hold any violators accountable to the fullest extent of the law.   Any wrongdoers will be caught and they will be accountable."

The Department of Justice announced today that Visa Inc. and Plaid Inc. have abandoned their planned $5.3 billion merger.

The department filed a civil antitrust lawsuit on Nov. 5, 2020, to stop the merger, alleging that Visa is a monopolist in online debit, charging consumers and merchants billions of dollars in fees each year to process online payments.  Plaid, a successful fintech firm, is developing a payments platform that would challenge Visa’s monopoly.  According to the complaint, the transaction would have enabled Visa to eliminate this competitive threat to its online debit business before Plaid had a chance to succeed, thereby enhancing or maintaining its monopoly.  The case was scheduled for trial in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on June 28, 2021.  As a result of Visa and Plaid’s decision to terminate their merger agreement, the United States has filed a Joint Stipulation of Dismissal.

“In a victory for American consumers and small businesses, Visa has abandoned its efforts to acquire an innovative and nascent competitor,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division.  “American consumers and business owners rely on the internet to buy and sell goods and services, and Visa – which has immense power in online debit in the United States– has extracted billions of dollars from those transactions.  Now that Visa has abandoned its anticompetitive merger, Plaid and other future fintech innovators are free to develop potential alternatives to Visa’s online debit services.  With more competition, consumers can expect lower prices and better services.”

Assistant Attorney General Delrahim continued, “The department is grateful for the team of dedicated civil servants, lawyers and economists, who carefully reviewed this merger and pursued the litigation, ultimately building a case that the merger would extinguish a nascent competitor, further entrench Visa’s dominance in the online debit market, and harm consumers.  Their diligent efforts to prosecute this case convinced the parties to abandon the deal rather than face us in court.  We wish both companies well as they innovate and work to provide their products to American consumers.” 

Visa Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Foster City, California.  Visa is a global payments company that operates the largest debit network in the United States.  Visa’s 2019 revenues were approximately $23 billion. 

Plaid Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered in San Francisco, California.  Plaid is a financial services company that operates the leading financial data aggregation platform in the United States.  In 2019, Plaid earned approximately $100 million in revenues. 

Seven Charlotte, North Carolina tax return preparers pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United States by preparing and filing false tax returns, announced Principal Deputy Assistant General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, U.S. Attorney R. Andrew Murray for the Western District of North Carolina, and Special Agent in Charge Matthew D. Line of the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI). 

Joseph Octave and Vonyeda Carson pleaded guilty on Jan. 12, 2021, while Melissa Greene, Natisha Holloman, Kimberly Joline, Whitney Vargas-Medrano and Wendia Courtois pleaded guilty earlier in 2020.  In addition to the conspiracy charge, Octave pleaded guilty to one count of aiding and assisting in the filing of false tax returns.

According to court documents and statements made in court, Octave owned and operated Kapital Financial Services, a tax preparation business with two offices located in Charlotte.  From 2014 through at least 2019, Octave and certain employees, specifically Carson, Courtois, Vargas-Medrano, Greene, Holloman, and Joline conspired to falsify clients’ tax returns by claiming deductions, business losses, American Opportunity credits, education credits, and earned income tax credits that the clients did not incur, in order to fraudulently increase refunds to be paid by the IRS.  Octave trained employees on how to file false returns and provided them with scripts and cheat sheets.  Octave instructed employees not to provide clients with copies of their tax returns and not to review the completed tax returns with clients beyond the refund amount.  By filing false returns, Octave and his co-conspirators increased their client base and unjustly enriched themselves.  As owner, Octave received the largest share of the $700,000 earned by Kapital Financial Services in preparation fees.

U.S. District Judge Max O. Cogburn Jr. will schedule sentencing at a later date. At sentencing, Octave faces a maximum of eight years in prison, and Carson, Courtois, Greene, Holloman, Joline, and Vargas-Medrano each face a maximum of five years in prison.  They all also face a period of supervised release, restitution, and monetary penalties.

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Zuckerman, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and Special Agent in Charge Line commended special agents of IRS-Criminal Investigation, who conducted the investigation, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Caryn Finley and Trial Attorney Brian Flanagan of the Tax Division, who are prosecuting the case.

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

The Department of Justice today announced that it signed a settlement agreement with Northgate Gonzalez Markets Inc., a California-based supermarket chain, and Northgate Gonzalez Financial LLC d/b/a Prospera Gonzalez, an affiliated payday loan company (collectively, Northgate).

The settlement resolves a claim that Northgate discriminated against a worker with asylum status when reverifying his eligibility to work in the United States, and fired him when he did not satisfy the company’s discriminatory requests, in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

“Employers must treat all workers who have the right to work in the United States fairly and consistent with the law, regardless of a worker’s citizenship status, immigration status, or national origin,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General John B. Daukas of the Civil Rights Division. “The Civil Rights Division is committed to protecting workers from unlawful discrimination.”

Based on its investigation, the department concluded that Northgate did not allow a worker with asylum status to provide his choice of valid documentation to show that he was authorized to work in the United States. Instead, when the employee offered to present an unrestricted Social Security card, which is legally sufficient to prove work authorization during the reverification process, Northgate rejected the document, demanded a document the worker did not have, and fired the worker when he did not present it. The INA’s anti-discrimination provision prohibits employers from requesting more or different documents than necessary to prove work authorization based on employees’ citizenship, immigration status or national origin. Instead, in the INA, Congress determined that all work-authorized individuals, regardless of citizenship status, may choose which valid, legally acceptable documents to present to demonstrate their ability to work in the United States. The INA does, however, permit employers to reject non-genuine looking documents.  

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Northgate will pay over $22,000 in back pay to the injured worker; pay a civil penalty to the United States; revise its policies and procedures; and train relevant employees on the INA’s anti-discrimination provision.

The Civil Rights Division’s Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER) is responsible for enforcing the anti-discrimination provision of the INA. The statute prohibits citizenship status and national origin discrimination in hiring, firing, or recruitment or referral for a fee; unfair documentary practices; and retaliation and intimidation.  

Learn more about IER’s work and how to get assistance through this brief video. Applicants or employees who believe they were discriminated against based on their citizenship, immigration status, or national origin in hiring, firing, recruitment, or during the employment eligibility verification process (e.g., Form I-9 and E-Verify); or subjected to retaliation, may file a charge. The public also can contact IER’s worker hotline at 1-800-255-7688; call IER’s employer hotline at 1-800-255-8155 (1-800-237-2515, TTY for hearing impaired); email IER@usdoj.gov; sign up for a free webinar; or visit IER’s English and Spanish websites. Subscribe to GovDelivery to receive updates from IER.

The Civil Rights Division wants to hear about civil rights violations. Members of the public can report possible civil rights violations through the Civil Rights Division’s reporting portal.

The Justice Department today reached a settlement under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) with the Board of Election Commissioners for the City of St. Louis to ensure that St. Louis polling places are accessible during elections to individuals with mobility and vision impairments. 

The Department of Justice reviewed the St. Louis Board’s voting program for compliance with the ADA. The department identified architectural barriers at St. Louis polling places, including inaccessible parking, ramps that were too steep, stairs at the only entrance or route to the voting area, and doorways with thresholds that were too high.

The department also identified that the St. Louis Board fails to provide accessible curbside voting and auxiliary aids and services, including headphones for some accessible voting machines, and also fails to provide voters with disabilities the same amount of privacy and independence while voting as voters without disabilities. Under the ADA, governmental entities that conduct local, state, or federal elections may not select polling places that are inaccessible to individuals with disabilities for use during elections, and they must make reasonable modifications to ensure equal opportunity to participate in voting programs.

“The department remains committed through its ADA Voting Initiative to ensuring that every eligible voter with a disability has an equal opportunity to participate in the voting programs of public entities,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General John Daukas for the Civil Rights Division. “This settlement ensures that eligible voters with disabilities in the City of St. Louis will be able to exercise their fundamental right to vote and participate in our democracy.”

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the St. Louis Board will begin remediating its voting program. To make its selected polling places accessible, the St. Louis Board will employ temporary measures, such as portable ramps, signage, and propped open doors. In addition, the St. Louis Board will train its poll workers and other elections staff on the requirements of the ADA and how to use temporary measures to ensure each polling place is accessible during elections. The St. Louis Board will also survey polling locations for accessibility and maintain the accessibility of each polling place it uses on election days. When selecting future polling places, the agreement requires the St. Louis Board to select locations that will be accessible during elections.

This settlement is part of the department’s ADA Voting Initiative, which focuses on protecting the voting rights of individuals with disabilities. A hallmark of the ADA Voting Initiative is its collaboration with jurisdictions to increase accessibility at polling places. Through this Initiative, the Department of Justice has surveyed more than 2,300 polling places and increased polling place accessibility in more than 50 jurisdictions, including Sandoval County, New Mexico; Harris County, Texas; Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania; and Anderson County, South Carolina.

For more information about the ADA and today’s agreement, please visit http://www.ada.gov or call the toll-free ADA Information Line at (800) 514-0301 or (800) 514-0383 (TTY).

Insitu Inc., headquartered in Bingen, Washington, has agreed to pay $25 million to settle allegations that it violated the False Claims Act by knowingly submitting materially false cost and pricing data for contracts with the U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and the Department of the Navy (Navy) to supply and operate Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), the Department of Justice announced today.   

“We expect companies that seek to do business with the government to provide complete and accurate information so contract prices can be negotiated on a level playing field,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department’s Civil Division Jeffrey Bossert Clark.  “This settlement demonstrates the Justice Department’s commitment to take appropriate action when it determines that taxpayer dollars have been misused.” 

“Taxpayers deserve to get what they paid for – especially in significant no-bid military contracts,” said U.S. Attorney Brian T. Moran for the Western District of Washington.  “Cases such as this one should be seen as a warning to defense contractors that false claims have no place in military purchasing.”

“The Naval Criminal Investigative Service is dedicated to protecting the taxpayer’s interests and safeguarding critical services for the war fighter,” stated Charles P. King, Special Agent in Charge, NCIS Northwest Field Office.  “The success of the Department of the Navy’s war fighting ability is dependent upon a sound, transparent and honest acquisition process.  I want to thank the Department of Justice and our law enforcement partners for their incredible support and dedication during this investigation.”

“Defense contractors are required to obey strict standards when proposing cost and pricing data for work to be performed on government contracts,” said Bryan D. Denny, Special Agent in Charge of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, Western Field Office.  “The pursuit and favorable settlement of this civil litigation is yet another example of our agents and law enforcement partners working together to uncover fraudulent activity and protect taxpayers' dollars entrusted to the DoD.”

Between Jan. 1, 2009 and Dec. 31, 2017, Insitu entered into five contracts with the Navy and two contracts with SOCOM for the supply and operation of UAVs, also known as “drones,” at various sites identified in the contracts.  The settlement resolves allegations that Insitu knowingly induced the government to award it these seven, noncompetitively bid contracts at inflated prices by proposing cost and pricing data for new parts and materials in support of its contract proposal while planning to and in fact using less expensive recycled, refurbished, reconditioned, and/or reconfigured parts to perform the contracts.   

The settlements resolve allegations filed in a lawsuit by D R O’Hara, a former executive of Insitu, in federal court in Seattle, Washington.  The lawsuit was filed under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act, which permit private individuals to sue on behalf of the government for false claims and to share in any recovery.  The act also allows the government to intervene and take over the action, as it did in this case.  O’Hara will receive $4,625,000 of the recovered funds.

The settlements were the result of a coordinated effort by the Commercial Litigation Branch (Fraud Section) of the Civil Division of the Department of Justice, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Washington, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, the Defense Contract Audit Agency, and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service.

The case is captioned United States ex rel. O’Hara v. Insitu, Inc. and The Boeing Company,Case No. C15-1527-JCC (W.D.Wash.).  The claims resolved by the settlements are allegations only and there has been no determination of liability.

The Department of Justice announced today that it has no intention to challenge proposed efforts by Baxalta US Inc., Emergent BioSolutions Inc., Grifols Therapeutics LLC, and CSL Plasma Inc. (together, the “Requesting Parties”) to assist the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) in designing quality standards for collecting COVID-19 convalescent plasma. 

“This public-private collaboration will support innovation to develop life-saving medicines to treat COVID-19,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division.  “The department continues to stand ready to advise and assist whenever businesses meeting the exigent challenges of the pandemic face complex questions of antitrust law.”

As the department’s business review letter explains, convalescent plasma is taken from individuals who have had and recovered from COVID-19.  The convalescent plasma can be given to patients directly, through infusion, or used to make hyperimmune globulin (HIg) therapies.  The Requesting Parties aim to assist BARDA in the development of quality assurance parameters so that COVID-19 convalescent plasma collected by blood banks for direct transfusion under Project Warp Speed can be repurposed for use in the development and manufacture of each Party’s HIg therapies targeting COVID-19.  The department believes these efforts are procompetitive to the extent that they will facilitate the more efficacious deployment of critical therapies for COVID-19, which could, in turn, improve the health and safety of Americans.  The Requesting Parties have also put in place safeguards that minimize the risk their conduct will lessen competition.

This is the sixth expedited COVID-19 business review letter issued by the department since the department and the Federal Trade Commission first set out an expedited, temporary review procedure in the Joint Antitrust Statement Regarding COVID-19 (the “Joint Statement”).  In April 2020, the department issued expedited business review letters to certain distributors of personal protective equipment (PPE) as well as the pharmaceuticals distributor AmerisourceBergen.  Over the next several months, the department issued additional expedited business review letters to the National Pork Producers Council, certain manufacturers of monoclonal antibodies for use in COVID-19 vaccines and therapies, and a voluntary membership association of beauty salons. 

Copies of the business review request and the department’s response are available on the Antitrust Division’s website at https://www.justice.gov/atr/business-review-letters-and-request-letters, as well as in a file maintained by the Antitrust Documents Group of the Antitrust Division.  After a 30-day waiting period, any documents supporting the business review will be added to the file, unless a basis for their exclusion for reasons of confidentiality has been established under the business review procedure.  Supporting documents in the file will be maintained for a period of one year, and copies will be available upon request to the FOIA/Privacy Act Unit, Antitrust Documents Group at atrdocs.grp@usdoj.gov.

Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen joined the Home Affairs, Interior, and Security Ministers of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom in issuing the following statement:

“We, the Home Affairs, Interior, and Security Ministers of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (‘the Five Countries’), are proud of our collective work alongside our European partners to combat online child sexual exploitation and abuse. Together, we have taken the lead in working with the world’s largest technology companies to develop new and better ways to protect children from the production and circulation of child sexual abuse material, grooming, live-streamed abuse, and all other forms of sexual abuse occurring on online platforms.

In this statement, we highlight how from December 21 2020, the ePrivacy Directive, applied without derogation, will make it easier for children to be sexually exploited and abused without detection – and how the ePrivacy Directive could make it impossible both for providers of internet communications services, and for law enforcement, to investigate and prevent such exploitation and abuse. It is accordingly essential that the European Union adopt urgently the derogation to the ePrivacy Directive as proposed by the European Commission in order for the essential work carried out by service providers to shield endangered children in Europe and around the world to continue.

Without decisive action, from December 21, 2020 internet-based messaging services and e-mail services captured by the European Electronic Communications Code’s (EECC) new, broader definition of ‘electronic communications services’ are covered by the ePrivacy Directive. The providers of electronic communications services must comply with the obligation to respect the confidentiality of communications and the conditions for processing communications data in accordance with the ePrivacy Directive. In the absence of any relevant national measures made under Article 15 of that Directive, this will have the effect of making it illegal for service providers operating within the EU to use their current tools to protect children, with the impact on victims felt worldwide.

We note the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs’ (LIBE) voted on December 7, 2020 in favor of the Temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58 as regards the use of technologies by number-independent interpersonal communications service providers for the processing of personal data and other data for the purpose of combatting child sexual abuse online. We now urge the Presidency of the Council, the European Commission and the European Parliament to come to a rapid agreement at Trilogue on a final text that ensures that this important work can continue as it does today.

The European Union has a unique role to play in the global fight against online child sexual exploitation. It is essential that the European Union adopt measures that ensure not only the legal authority, but also the practical ability, for providers to use tools to detect online child sexual exploitation. For example, a requirement that tools have false positives less than 1:50 billion would prevent the use of some of the most common and effective tools used today to rescue children. Without that ability the Union places its own Strategy for a More Effective Fight against Child Sexual Abuse in jeopardy.

In July 2020, we welcomed the launch of the European Union (EU) Strategy for a More Effective Fight against Child Sexual Abuse. In particular, we were pleased to see the EU commit to ‘propose the necessary legislation to tackle child sexual abuse online effectively, including by requiring relevant online services providers to detect known child sexual abuse material and to report that material to public authorities.’

These commitments strongly align with the Voluntary Principles to Counter Online Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse, which were developed by the Five Countries in close consultation with six leading platforms. We launched the Voluntary Principles in March 2020 to provide a framework for the technology industry to combat online child sexual exploitation and abuse—they are intended to drive both individual company efforts and collective industry action. But those Voluntary Principles are predicated upon the continuation of companies’ legal and technical ability to identify and take action against child sexual abuse content and activity on their platforms.

Certain providers of communications services already voluntarily use specific technologies to detect, report, and remove child sexual abuse material on their services. United States-based electronic service providers are legally obliged to report instances of child sexual abuse to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). In 2019, these electronic service providers made 16.9 million reports to NCMEC, comprising 69.1 million videos, images and files. The number of reports in 2020 is expected to eclipse previous years, with NCMEC President and Chief Executive Officer John F. Clark noting, in his letter of November 2020 to Members of the European Parliament, that ‘[i]n the first nine months of 2020, more than 52 million child sexual abuse files have been reported to NCMEC, and more than 2.3 million of these files involve an offender or a child victim in the EU’.

The vast majority of NCMEC reports come from direct messaging services and are usually generated as a result of platforms’ use of automated hashing measures (such as PhotoDNA), grooming indicators, artificial intelligence and other technologies to identify and report child sexual abuse material. The Commission’s proposals for a temporary derogation address the unintended consequences of the EECC and ensures companies can continue to use highly effective tools to detect, report and remove child sexual abuse material online until at least the end of 2022.

We are now calling upon friends and partners in the EU to carry out their responsibility to protect not only European children, but also children around the world whose abuse will be shared among EU citizens that providers will be blind to stop. We therefore urge you, on behalf of children around the world, to allow the work that is being done to protect them from sexual abuse and exploitation to continue.

We look forward to continuing to work with you as your closest international partners in tackling child sexual exploitation and abuse, both in our respective countries and around the world.”

Signatories,

Jeffrey A. Rosen, Acting Attorney General of the United States

Rt Hon Priti Patel MP, Secretary of State for the Home Department for the United Kingdom

The Hon Peter Dutton MP, Minister for Home Affairs for Australia

The Hon Jan Tinetti, Minister of Internal Affairs for New Zealand

The Hon Bill Blair, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness for Canada

The Department of Justice announced today that it has completed its investigation into whether Georgetown Day School, Holton-Arms School, Landon School, Maret School, National Cathedral School, The Potomac School, St. Albans School, and Sidwell Friends School (jointly, “the Schools”) collectively agreed to stop offering Advanced Placement (AP) courses by 2022 in violation of the Sherman Act.  The Schools announced in June 2018 that they would eliminate AP courses from their curricula by 2022. 

The Antitrust Division’s investigation revealed that the Schools likely did agree to eliminate AP courses by 2022.  Each of the Schools has represented to the Antitrust Division, however, that they are not bound by, and will not enter in the future, any agreement with another non-affiliated school or schools relating to the elimination of AP courses.  As a matter of prosecutorial discretion, and especially in light of the burden on the Schools associated with the ongoing pandemic, the division will not bring an enforcement action against the Schools.     

“I am pleased that the Schools have disavowed any anticompetitive agreement to coordinate on their offerings to students,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim.  “The division will remain vigilant in enforcing the antitrust laws to ensure that educational institutions do not enter into agreements to restrain competition.”

ST. LOUIS, MO – United States District Judge Catherine D. Perry sentenced Daquan Marshall to 120 months in prison. The 26-year-old St. Louis resident pleaded guilty to one count of armed robbery and one count of brandishing a firearm in furtherance of an armed robbery on July 7, 2020.

On December 21, 2018, around 10:15 p.m., employees of the Church’s Chicken located in the 900 block of N. Grand Boulevard in St. Louis, Missouri, were cleaning the store after closing. While cleaning, the store manager heard knocking at the back door. The store manager went to the back door and asked who was knocking. Marshall identified himself by his nickname. The store manager knew Marshall because he was a former employee and had dated an employee. The manager told Marshall to go to the front door.

The store manager unlocked the front door and let Marshall inside the restaurant. Marshall pulled out a handgun and pointed it at the employees. Marshall ordered all the employees to put up their hands and threatened to shoot one employee when he resisted. Marshall pointed the gun at the store manager and ordered the store manager to open the safe. The store manager complied and triggered the silent alarm when opening the safe. The manager gave Marshall $300 from the safe and Marshall left restaurant.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation and St Louis Metropolitan Police Department investigated the case. Special Assistant United States Attorney Jennifer Szczucinski prosecuted the case for the United States Attorney’s Office as part of the Safer Streets Initiative. The initiative was launched by Attorney General Schmitt and former U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen in January of 2019 as an unprecedented state and federal partnership to prosecute violent crime in St. Louis.

#####

A spokesperson for the Department of Justice issued the following statement:

“Please be advised that the information circulating on social media claiming to be from Acting Pardon Attorney Rosalind Sargent-Burns is inauthentic and should not be taken seriously. 

"The Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney does not have a social media presence and is not involved in any efforts to pardon individuals or groups involved with the heinous acts that took place this week in and around the U.S. Capitol."

Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen issued the following statement:

“Our thoughts and prayers are with the family and fellow officers of U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian D. Sicknick, who succumbed last night to the injuries he suffered defending the U.S. Capitol, against the violent mob who stormed it on January 6th.  The FBI and Metropolitan Police Department will jointly investigate the case and the Department of Justice will spare no resources in investigating and holding accountable those responsible.”

A Rhode Island man was sentenced to three years in prison today for tax evasion, announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division, U.S. Attorney Aaron L. Weisman for the District of Rhode Island, and Special Agent in Charge Kristina O’Connell of IRS Criminal Investigation.

According to court documents, for more than ten years, Billie R. Schofield attempted to evade his federal income taxes. Schofield partly owned and worked for Northern Pelagic LLC, a seafood processing business located in New Bedford, Massachusetts. Despite earning hundreds of thousands of dollars in income, Schofield failed to pay taxes owed and, beginning in 2009, stopped filing income tax returns. Between 2008 and 2018, Schofield obstructed IRS efforts to assess and collect his taxes by filing fraudulent forms, advancing frivolous tax arguments, creating and using a nominee entity and bank account, negotiating income checks to cash, and creating and submitting fraudulent checks to the IRS in an attempt to extinguish his tax liabilities. Including penalties and interest, Schofield caused a tax loss of more than $350,000 to the United States.

In addition to a term of imprisonment, U.S. District Judge William E. Smith sentenced Schofield to three years of supervised release, a $5,000 fine, and ordered him to pay $364,200.22 in restitution to the IRS. 

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Zuckerman and U.S. Attorney Weisman commended special agents of IRS-CI, who investigated the case, and Trial Attorney Christopher P. O’Donnell of the Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorney Sandra Hebert, who prosecuted the case.

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

Former Hamtramck police office Ryan McInerney, 44, pleaded guilty today in federal court in the Eastern District of Michigan to using excessive force against a civilian arrestee and violating the arrestee’s civil rights.

As a result of the assault, the victim, identified in court documents only as D.M., suffered broken facial bones and lacerations requiring stitches, among other injuries.

At the plea hearing, the defendant admitted that on the night of June 22, 2014, while he was on duty as a Hamtramck Police Department (HPD) officer, he initiated a traffic stop on D.M. After D.M. stopped his car, the defendant approached the driver’s side door and ordered D.M. to put his hands up. D.M. complied. Regardless, and without justification, the defendant pistol whipped D.M. several times in the face, using his service firearm, through the open window of D.M.’s car door. D.M. did not present a danger to the defendant, and there was no lawful reason for the pistol-whipping. The strikes caused D.M. to suffer broken facial bones, among other injuries.

The defendant further admitted that he intentionally memorialized a false account of this incident in an official HPD use of force form in order to cover up his excessive use of force against D.M. and to impede any further investigation of this incident. The defendant also admitted that, later that same night during a different arrest, he pistol-whipped a second civilian, identified as J.M., also without justification, breaking J.M.’s teeth.

“Officers are supposed to serve as role model for upholding the law,” said Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, Eric Dreiband. “It is disheartening to hear of a police officer taking such actions. The Justice Department works hard to ensure that officers who take the law into their own hands see their day in court.”

“Most police officers honorably serve and uphold their mission to protect the citizens of Michigan, but this is a rare example of an officer who has fallen far below his duty,” said U.S. Attorney Matthew Schneider of the Eastern District of Michigan. “Officer McInerney abused the power of his badge by violating the civil rights of two Michigan citizens, and for that he deserves federal prison time.”

“Police officers take an oath to protect, serve, and uphold the law. When an officer betrays that oath by violating a person’s civil rights, the FBI will make it a priority to hold the officer accountable,” said Timothy Waters, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI in Michigan. “Ryan McInerney’s actions were a betrayal of the trust his community placed in him and are not reflective of the honorable way in which the men and women of the Hamtramck Police Department work to keep their community safe.”

McInerney will be sentenced on April 19, 2021. If the court accepts the plea agreement, McInerney faces a maximum sentence of 36 months in prison.

This case is being investigated by the FBI and is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Frances Carlson of the Eastern District of Michigan and Trial Attorney Risa Berkower of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.

A Florida medical doctor pleaded guilty to conspiring to falsify clinical trial data regarding an asthma medication, the Department of Justice announced today.

Dr. Yvelice Villaman Bencosme, 64, of Miami, Florida, pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida today to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Bencosme was a licensed medical doctor who served as the primary investigator for clinical trials purportedly conducted at a medical clinic called Unlimited Medical Research (Unlimited Medical) in Miami. In pleading guilty, Bencosme admitted that from approximately 2013 to 2016, she participated in a scheme to defraud an unnamed pharmaceutical company by fabricating the data and participation of subjects in a clinical trial at Unlimited Medical. The clinical trial was designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of an asthma medication in children between the ages of four and 11. Bencosme admitted that she falsified medical records to make it appear that pediatric subjects arrived for scheduled visits at Unlimited Medical, took study drugs as required, and received checks as payment for site visits.

“Clinical trials are critical to ensuring the safety and effectiveness of new drugs. Falsifying that data can endanger consumers,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Bossert Clark of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The Department of Justice will continue to work hand-in-hand with the FDA to investigate and prosecute fraudsters who put personal profit before public health.” 

“When those charged with investigating the efficacy of new drugs manipulate the data for personal profit, they violate the public’s trust and pose serious threats to our collective health and safety,” said U.S. Attorney Ariana Fajardo Orshan for the Southern District of Florida. “Such selfish and irresponsible behavior is criminal and will be prosecuted.”         

“FDA’s evaluation of a new drug begins with an analysis of reliable and accurate data from clinical trials. Compromised clinical trial data could impact the agency’s decisions about the safety and effectiveness of the drug under review,” said Special Agent in Charge Justin C. Fielder of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Office of Criminal Investigations, Miami Field Office. “We will continue to investigate and bring to justice those who deny the public their right to safe and effective medicines.”

Bencosme pleaded guilty before U.S. District Court Judge Beth Bloom. When sentenced, Bencosme faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. Bencosme is the second defendant to plead guilty in this matter. Lisett Raventos, a former study coordinator at Unlimited Medical, pleaded guilty to a conspiracy charge in November 2020. Two other defendants were charged in connection with the scheme, and they are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Trial Attorneys Joshua Rothman and Kara M. Traster of the Department of Justice Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch are prosecuting the case. The FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations, Miami Field Office, investigated the case, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Southern District of Florida provided critical assistance.

El ex oficial policía de Hamtramck, Ryan McInerney, 44, se declaró culpable hoy en la corte federal del Distrito de Michigan por usar fuerza excesiva en contra de un civil arrestado y violación de los Derechos Civiles del arrestado.

Como resultado del asalto, la víctima, identificado en los documentos de corte sólo como D.M., sufrió de fracturas de huesos faciales y laceraciones que requirieron de puntos, entre otras heridas.

En la audiencia de declaración, el acusado admitió que la noche del 22 de junio de 2014, mientras se encontraba en servicio como oficial del Departamento de Policía de Hamtramck (HPD),  inició un control de tránsito a D.M. Después D.M. detuvo su auto, el acusado se acercó a la puerta lateral del conductor y le ordenó a D.M. que subiera las manos. D.M. cumplió. Sin importar, y sin justificación, la pistola del acusado golpeó a D.M varias veces en la cara, usando su arma de servicio, por medio de la ventana abierta del auto de D.M. D.M. no representó un peligro para del acusado y no hubo razón legítima para los golpes con la pistola. Los golpes provocaron que D.M. tuviera huesos fracturados en la cara, entre otras heridas.

El acusado también admitió que memorizó intencionalmente anotó un cargo falso para este incidente en un HPD oficial del uso de fuerza para cubrir su uso de fuerza excesivo contra D.M. y para impedir cualquier investigación futura de este incidente. El acusado también admitió que, más tarde esa misma noche durante un arresto diferente, golpeó con su pistola a un segundo civil identificado como J.M., también sin justificación, y le rompió los dientes a J.M..

“Los oficiales están supuestos a servir como ejemplos para sostener la ley”, dijo el Fiscal General Interino para la División de Derechos Civiles, Eric Dreiband. “Es desalentador escuchar a un oficial de policía hablar sobre dichas acciones. El Departamento de Justicia trabaja fuerte para asegurar que los oficiales que toman la ley en sus propias manos verán sus días en la corte”.

“La mayoría de los oficiales de policía sirven honorablemente y cumplen su misión para proteger a los ciudadanos de Michigan, pero es un ejemplo raro de un oficial que cayó por debajo de su obligación”, dijo el Fiscal de EE.UU., Matthew Schneider, del Distrito del Este de Michigan. “El Oficial McInerney abusó del poder de su placa al violar los Derechos Civiles de dos ciudadanos de Michigan y por ello merece pasar tiempo en la prisión federal”.

“Los oficiales de policía hacen juramento para proteger, servir y respetar la ley. Cuando un oficial traiciona el juramento al violar los Derechos Civiles de una persona, el FBI dará prioridad a hacer responsable al oficial”, dijo Timothy Waters, Agente Especial a Cargo del FBI en Michigan. “Los actos de Ryan McInerney fueron una traición a la confianza que puso su comunidad en él y no reflejan de forma honorable en la que los hombres y mujeres del Departamento de Policía de Hamtramck trabaja para mantener la seguridad de la comunidad”.

McInerney será sentenciado el 19 de abril de 2021. Si la corte acepta el acuerdo de súplica, McInerney enfrenta una sentencia máxima de 36 meses en prisión.

Este caso está siendo investigado por el FBI y será condenado por el Fiscal Asistente de EE.UU. Frances Carlson del Distrito Este deMichigan y el Abogado Litigante Risa Berkower de la División de Derechos Civiles del Departamento de Justicia.

A federal court entered a permanent injunction barring a Georgia company from selling unapproved vitamin D products touted as treatments for COVID-19, the Department of Justice announced today.

In a civil complaint and accompanying court papers filed Nov. 23, 2020, in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, the United States alleges that Matthew Ryncarz and his Alpharetta, Georgia, based companies, Fusion Health and Vitality LLC dba Pharm Origins, and Fusion Ionz LLC dba Pharm Origins, sold and distributed products the defendants claimed would cure, mitigate, or treat COVID-19 and other diseases. According to the government’s complaint, the defendants sold several products that purportedly contained vitamin D3, such as “Immune Shot,” “Immune Boost,” and “Core,” through websites maintained by the defendants. The complaint alleges that none of the products were generally recognized as safe and effective by qualified experts for any of the uses promoted by the defendants.

“The Department of Justice will not allow individuals to take advantage of consumers during a public health emergency by making unproven claims about unapproved drugs to profit from public panic,” said Deputy Assistant Attorney General Daniel J. Feith. “We will continue to work closely with the Food and Drug Administration to halt such conduct.”

“In challenging times, we must be especially vigilant on behalf of the most vulnerable,” said U.S. Attorney Bobby L. Christine for the Southern District of Georgia. “Our office and our law enforcement partners take very seriously our responsibility to help protect consumers, and we will identify and shut down such attempted financial and emotional exploitation.”  

“Americans expect and deserve medical treatments that have been scientifically proven to be safe and effective. Making claims that unproven drugs can cure or prevent diseases, including COVID-19, places consumers’ health at risk,” said U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Chief Counsel Stacy Amin. “We remain committed to pursuing and taking swift action against those who attempt to subvert the regulatory functions of the FDA by repeatedly disregarding the law and distributing unapproved products.”

According to the complaint, the defendants violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) by introducing unapproved new drugs into interstate commerce. The complaint alleges that the defendants’ disease-related treatment claims lacked support from any well-controlled clinical studies or other credible scientific evidence. The complaint also asserts that such claims made in absence of any clinical data caused the products to be misbranded under the FDCA. Ryncarz and his company, Fusion Health, pleaded guilty on Sept. 29, 2020, in a separate but related criminal case in which Ryncarz admitted that labeling for his “Immune Shot” product falsely claimed it would lower the risk of contracting COVID-19 and that the product was misbranded under the FDCA.

The civil enforcement action against Ryncarz and Fusion Health is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Claude Scott of the Department of Justice Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch and Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan A. Porter of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Georgia, with assistance from FDA Associate Chief Counsel for Enforcement Jennifer Argabright.

Additional information about the Consumer Protection Branch and its enforcement efforts may be found at www.justice.gov/civil/consumer-protection-branch. For more information about the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Georgia, visit its website at https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdga. For the most up-to-date information on COVID-19, consumers may visit the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and WHO websites.

The public is urged to report suspected fraud schemes related to COVID-19 by calling the National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDF) hotline (1-866-720-5721) or by e-mailing the NCDF at disaster@leo.gov. For more information about the Justice Department’s efforts to stop illegal COVID-19-related activity, visit www.justice.gov/coronavirus.

“Yesterday, our Nation watched in disbelief as a mob breached the Capitol Building and required federal and local law enforcement to help restore order.  The Department of Justice is committed to ensuring that those responsible for this attack on our Government and the rule of law face the full consequences of their actions under the law.  Our criminal prosecutors have been working throughout the night with special agents and investigators from the U.S. Capitol Police, FBI, ATF, Metropolitan Police Department and the public to gather the evidence, identify perpetrators, and charge federal crimes where warranted.  Some participants in yesterday’s violence will be charged today, and we will continue to methodically assess evidence, charge crimes and make arrests in the coming days and weeks to ensure that those responsible are held accountable under the law.”

The Justice Department announced today that it has opened an investigation into the use of pepper spray at two juvenile correctional facilities run by the Nevada Juvenile Justice Services Agency: the Nevada Youth Training Center and the Summit View Youth Center.  The investigation will examine whether staff at the two facilities use pepper spray in a manner that violates youth’s rights under the Constitution.

The department has not reached any conclusions regarding the allegations in this matter.  The investigation will be conducted under the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA) and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act.  Both statutes give the department the authority to investigate systemic violations of the constitutional rights of young people in juvenile detention and correctional facilities.  The department’s work has led to important reforms to protect the rights of young people housed in those facilities. 

The Civil Rights Division’s Special Litigation Section is conducting this investigation.  Individuals with relevant information are encouraged to contact the department via phone at 1- 833-591-0426 or by email at Community.NVJuveniles@usdoj.gov.

Additional information about the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department is available on its website at www.justice.gov/crt.

A federal grand jury returned a two-count indictment charging Surgical Care Affiliates LLC and its related entity (collectively SCA), which own and operate outpatient medical care centers across the country, for agreeing with competitors not to solicit senior-level employees, the Department of Justice announced today.  These are the Antitrust Division’s first charges in this ongoing investigation into employee allocation agreements.

“The charges demonstrate the Antitrust Division’s continued commitment to criminally prosecute collusion in America’s labor markets,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division.  “A freely competitive employment market is essential to the health of our economy and the mobility of American workers.  Along with our law enforcement partners, the division will ensure that companies who illegally deprive employees of competitive opportunities are not immune from our antitrust laws.”

“The charges demonstrate the FBI’s commitment to ensuring a free market and protecting opportunities for American workers,” said Steven M. D’Antuono, Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI Washington Field Office.  “The FBI will continue to work with our partners to root out this type of illegal activity and deter employer collusion that harms the American people and workers.”

“Companies competing for top-level talent is the bedrock of the American labor market,” said U.S. Attorney Erin Nealy Cox for the Northern District of Texas.  “The Northern District of Texas is proud to partner with the Antitrust Division to prosecute Sherman Act violations.”

The indictment, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, charges SCA with entering into and engaging in two separate bilateral conspiracies with other health care companies to suppress competition between them for the services of senior-level employees, in violation of the Sherman Act.  Beginning at least as early as May 2010 and continuing until at least as late as October 2017, SCA conspired with a company based in Texas to allocate senior-level employees by agreeing not to solicit each other’s senior-level employees.  Beginning at least as early as February 2012 and continuing until at least as late as July 2017, SCA separately conspired with a company based in Colorado to allocate senior-level employees through a similar non-solicitation agreement. 

An indictment merely alleges that crimes have been committed, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

A violation of the Sherman Act carries a maximum penalty of a $100 million fine for corporations.  The fine may be increased to twice the gain derived from the crime or twice the loss suffered by victims if either amount is greater than the statutory maximum.  

Today’s announcement is the result of an ongoing federal investigation being conducted by the Antitrust Division’s Washington Criminal II Section and the Washington Field Office of the FBI.  Anyone with information on market allocation or price fixing by employers should contact the Antitrust Division’s Citizen Complaint Center at 1-888-647-3258 or visit https://www.justice.gov/atr/citizen-complaint-center.

Assistant Attorney General Eric S. Dreiband of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division announced his departure from the department, effective Jan. 8, 2021.  Dreiband has served as Assistant Attorney General since Nov. 1, 2018. 

“It has been the honor of a lifetime to serve as Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division,” said Assistant Attorney General Eric S. Dreiband.  “The United States of America is and must remain committed to the principle that all persons are created equal and should be judged because of their character, conduct, talent, work, and skills.  Our Constitution and civil rights laws embody the ideals that all persons have worth, and are entitled to equal justice, respect, decency, peace, and safety.  It is the duty of government to secure these rights, and it is the duty of the Civil Rights Division to protect all people in this nation against any violation of these rights, including hate-motivated violence, exploitation, unlawful discrimination and bigotry, and any other infringement of our Constitutional and federal civil rights.  The Civil Rights Division fulfills its duty by enforcing the federal civil rights laws and seeking justice for victims.  The Civil Rights Division’s enforcement of our civil rights laws also punishes lawbreakers, vindicates the rights of victims, and sends a message to the nation and the world that the United States government and its people do not tolerate illegal bigotry, discrimination, and exploitation of anyone.”

Under Assistant Attorney General Dreiband’s leadership, the career professionals of the Civil Rights Division set enforcement records and ensured that no area of civil or constitutional rights went unprotected.  The division vigorously prosecuted hate crimes, including for the mass-murders at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; at an El Paso, Texas Walmart where 23 innocent people were killed, and; Charlottesville, Virginia where a white supremacist drove a car into a crowd of protesters.  Under Assistant Attorney General Dreiband, the Civil Rights Division filed more sexual harassment in housing lawsuits than ever; protected and sought and obtained relief for victims of racial discrimination in employment, housing, voting, lending, and other areas; held law enforcement accountable; protected U.S. workers; protected free speech, religious exercise, and other rights under the Constitution during the COVID-19 pandemic, and; filed more cases in 2020 on behalf of servicemembers than in any prior year. 

Assistant Attorney General Dreiband defended civil and constitutional rights newly under threat or previously overlooked, in addition to aggressively enforcing traditional areas of civil rights protections.  That record of accomplishments by the Civil Rights Division includes:

Record Response to Instances of Law Enforcement Misconduct.  The Civil Rights Division prosecutes those law enforcement officers who betray the public trust by violating constitutional or other federally-protected rights.  In 2019, the division prosecuted more of these criminal cases than ever in its history.  These cases typically involved instances of excessive force by police or corrections officers.

Highest Number of Hate Crimes Cases in Decades.  Federal law prohibits hate crimes involving physical harm and criminal threats motivated by the victims’ protected traits, such as religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, or disability.  Under Dreiband’s leadership, federal prosecutors fully and fairly enforced these protections.  In 2020, the number of hate crime cases charged by the division was the highest in two decades. 

Racial Justice.  As to racial discrimination, the division has brought and successfully resolved cases involving racial discrimination in employment by local governments, including law enforcement agencies under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; racial discrimination in housing, including racial steering, under the Fair Housing Act; racially discriminatory lending under the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act; race discrimination in voting under the Voting Rights Act; and to allow high school students to apply to college without illegal discrimination under the Constitution and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 based on the color of their skin. 

Record Number of Sexual Harassment Cases.  In 2020, the Civil Rights Division filed more sexual harassment lawsuits against landlords than in any prior year.  The division also successfully prosecuted sexual harassment cases against state and local government employers, including on behalf of female firefighters, and against public schools and universities.    

Protecting Religious Liberty.  Under the Civil Rights Division’s Place to Worship Initiative, the division significantly increased the number of lawsuits and investigations protecting the right of religious worship of Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Native Americans, and others.  Combatting anti-Semitism, including in the form of hate crimes, was also a priority.  In the Supreme Court of the United States, the division contributed to victories for religious liberty including the rights of religious employers, such as Catholic schools, and the right to attend parochial schools free of religious discrimination in scholarship programs. 

Prison Reform.  The Civil Rights Division during Dreiband’s tenure investigated, litigated, and successfully resolved cases that involve reforms of state and local prisons and jails.  These include cases involving alleged pattern or practice violations of the Constitution against a state prison system for men for guard-on-prisoner excessive force, prisoner-on-prisoner violence, and sexual abuse; state prisons for sexual abuse of female prisoners; state prisons and local jails for excessive force against prisoners; the failure of juvenile justice systems to keep youth reasonably safe from youth-on-youth violence, and; other violations of the Constitution and other federal rights.  

Protecting U.S. Workers.  The division’s Protecting U.S. Workers Initiative, which combats employers who abuse temporary foreign visa programs (e.g., H-1 or H-2 visas) by discriminating against U.S. Workers, secured back pay to affected U.S. workers and civil penalties and recently filed a case against a major social media company for its alleged abuse of the temporary visa program.

Increased Resources to Fight Human Trafficking.  Under Dreiband’s leadership, the division significantly increased the number of prosecutors who are dedicated to prosecuting the modern-day slavery of human trafficking — both in the commercial sex industry and as to forced labor.  The division and its U.S. Attorney partners brought over 700 human trafficking cases in recent years.

Disability Rights.  During Dreiband’s tenure, the division successfully investigated, litigated, and settled hundreds of disability-rights cases.  A few examples illustrate this important work.  The division reached major settlements with West Virginia to reform its children’s mental health system; Amtrak to make its train stations accessible to individuals with disabilities; North Dakota to end unnecessary segregation of individuals with physical disabilities, and; Harris County, Texas to provide accessible voting to voters with disabilities.  The division also successfully tried to verdict a lawsuit against the State of Mississippi that alleged that Mississippi violates the Americans with Disabilities Act by unnecessarily segregating people with mental illness in its state hospitals and placing people with mental illness at serious risk of hospitalization as a result of insufficient community-based services.  The Civil Rights Division also defended in court protections against coercive abortions for women and their unborn children who are diagnosed with Down’s syndrome. 

COVID-19 Restrictions.  Because there is no pandemic exception to the Constitution and our civil rights laws, the Civil Rights Division successfully fought unlawful pandemic-related restrictions that infringe on individual liberties, including First Amendment rights to free speech and free exercise of religion, in numerous jurisdictions across the nation.