District Not Recorded
The source did not name an office we could identify. These records remain unassigned rather than guessed.
Justice Department Settles with Texas-Based Staffing Company to Resolve Immigration-Related DiscriminationRead the Press Release
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 [email protected]; 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.
Justice Department Recovers over $2.2 Billion from False Claims Act Cases in Fiscal Year 2020Read the Press Release
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.
Justice Department Issues Favorable Business Review Letter to Institute of International Finance for Sovereign Debt Information Sharing PrinciplesRead the Press Release
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 [email protected].
Justice Department Files Lawsuit Against Two California Doctors for Discrimination Against Patient with HIVRead the Press Release
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.
Former Mayor of Yona, Guam Sentenced to Prison for ExtortionRead the Press Release
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 Jusiticia Llega a un Acuerdo con una Agencia de Empleo con Sede en Tejas que Resuelve Casos de Discriminación Relacionada con la InmigraciónRead the Press Release
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 Attends Security Briefing at FBI’s Strategic Information and Operations Center on Inauguration Planning and Recent Capitol AttackRead the Press Release
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.
Minnesota Man Pleads Guilty to Providing Material Support to ISISRead the Press Release
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.
Justice Department Welcomes Passage of the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act of 2020Read the Press Release
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.
Justice Department Settles with New Jersey-Based Staffing Company to Resolve Immigration-Related Discrimination ClaimsRead the Press Release
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 [email protected]; 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.
Justice Department Publishes Statement on 2016 President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology ReportRead the Press Release
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.
Justice Department Issues Business Review Letter for Proposed University Technology Licensing ProgramRead the Press Release
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 [email protected].
EOIR Announces the Release of a Comprehensive Policy ManualRead the Press Release
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's Video Statement on the Seizure of the U.S. CapitolRead the Press Release
Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen's Video Statement on the Seizure of the U.S. CapitolActing 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."
Visa and Plaid Abandon Merger After Antitrust Division’s Suit to BlockRead the Press Release
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 North Carolina Tax Preparers Plead Guilty to Conspiring to Defraud the IRSRead the Press Release
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.
Justice Department Settles Claims Against California Supermarket Chain and Affiliated Money Lender for Discriminating Against Asylee WorkerRead the Press Release
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 [email protected]; 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.
Justice Department Reaches Agreement with the Board of Election Commissioners for the City of St. Louis to Ensure Polling Place Accessibility for Voters with DisabilitiesRead the Press Release
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. to Pay $25 Million to Settle False Claims Act Case Alleging Knowing Overcharges on Unmanned Aerial Vehicle ContractsRead the Press Release
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.
Department of Justice Issues Positive Business Review Letter to Companies Developing Plasma Therapies for Covid-19Read the Press Release
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 [email protected].
Acting AG and Five Country Statement on the Temporary Derogation to the ePrivacy Directive to Combat Child Sexual Exploitation and AbuseRead the Press Release
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
Justice Department Concludes Its Investigation of D.C.-Area Private High Schools’ Decision to Stop Offering Advanced Placement CoursesRead the Press Release
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.”
Judge sentences St. Louis man for armed robbery at Church’s ChickenRead the Press Release
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.
#####
Statement on Misinformation on Social Media Regarding the Office of the Pardon AttorneyRead the Press Release
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."
Statement of Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen on the Death of U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian D. SicknickRead the Press Release
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.”
Former Owner of Seafood Processor Sentenced to Prison for Tax EvasionRead the Press Release
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, Michigan Police Officer Pleads Guilty to Federal Civil Rights Charge for Excessive Use of ForceRead the Press Release
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.
Florida Medical Doctor Pleads Guilty to Conspiring to Falsify Clinical Trial DataRead the Press Release
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.
Ex oficial de policía de Hamtramck, Michigan se declara culpable por el cargo Derechos Civiles Federal por uso excesivo de fuerzaRead the Press Release
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.
Court Orders Georgia Defendants to Stop Selling Vitamin D Products as Treatments for Covid-19 and Other DiseasesRead the Press Release
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 [email protected]. For more information about the Justice Department’s efforts to stop illegal COVID-19-related activity, visit www.justice.gov/coronavirus.
Statement of Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. RosenRead the Press Release
“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.”
Justice Department Announces Civil Investigation into Chemical Restraint Use at Two Nevada Juvenile FacilitiesRead the Press Release
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 [email protected].
Additional information about the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department is available on its website at www.justice.gov/crt.
Health Care Company Indicted for Labor Market CollusionRead the Press Release
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 Dreiband Announces Departure from Civil Rights DivisionRead the Press Release
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.
Vivint Smart Homes Inc. to Pay $3.2 Million to Resolve Allegations of False Statements to Federally Insured BankRead the Press Release
Vivint Smart Home Inc. (Vivint), based in Provo, Utah, has agreed to pay the United States $3.2 million to resolve allegations under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA) that Vivint employees made false statements to secure financing for customers’ purchases of Vivint’s home monitoring products, the Justice Department announced today. FIRREA imposes civil penalties on any person or entity that violates certain predicate federal statutes.
Vivint is a provider of smart home monitoring services and frequently obtains new customers through door-to-door sales by Vivint sales representatives. The United States contended that, from 2017 to 2020, certain Vivint sales representatives used their personal funds to cover the cost of initial financing payments on behalf of Vivint customers who sought financing to purchase Vivint’s products, while making false and misleading statements to the federally insured financial institution providing the financing that made it appear as if the borrowers had funded the initial payments.
“Making false statements about the creditworthiness of borrowers undermines the integrity of our banking system and puts at risk the taxpayer dollars that help to support it,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Bossert Clark of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “We will pursue those who fail to provide truthful information needed by federally insured financial institutions to make appropriate lending decisions.”
“American business should be based on truthful disclosures, and false and misleading statements should never be part of dealings with federally insured financial institutions,” said U.S. Attorney John W. Huber for the District of Utah. “This resolution should send a strong message to corporations that using fraudulent tactics to secure consumer sales will not be tolerated.”
The allegations resolved by the settlement were initially provided to the United States in a declaration submitted under the Financial Institutions Anti-Fraud Enforcement Act, which provides for rewards to eligible declarants who provide information about potential FIRREA violations. The declarant’s share of the recovery in this matter has not yet been determined.
This matter was investigated by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Utah and the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch (Fraud Section). Investigative assistance was provided by the FBI.
The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.
Justice Department Applauds the Passage and Enactment of the Servicemembers and Veterans Initiative Act of 2020Read the Press Release
On Jan. 5, 2021, President Donald J. Trump signed H.R. 8354, the Servicemembers and Veterans Initiative Act of 2020, a bill to permanently establish the Servicemembers and Veterans Initiative, or “SVI”, within the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice.
SVI’s mission is to support the department in its efforts to protect those who protect us all. The SVI is a proven and effective vehicle for coordinating the department’s servicemember-related litigation efforts as well as delivering training, technical assistance, and other support to Assistant U.S. Attorneys (AUSAs), servicemembers, veterans, and their families.
“We applaud both houses of Congress for their bipartisan action to recognize the important work that is being done within the Civil Rights Division and codify the role of the Servicemembers and Veterans Initiative within our organization,” said Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. “The Civil Rights Division has been at the forefront of litigation and outreach intended to ensure that servicemembers, veterans and their families do not have to bear undue burdens caused by civil rights violations as a result of their military service.”
SVI coordinates with Department of Justice components and federal agencies to build a comprehensive legal support and protection network focused on serving servicemembers, veterans, and their families. The Civil Rights Division is the Department of Justice component that enforces the majority of servicemember-related statutes, including: the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The initiative builds upon this critical enforcement work, as well as the work of other department components that serve the military community, by sharing information, identifying servicemember and veteran needs, and coordinating the distribution of resources. The SVI also coordinates its training programs with the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch to investigate and prosecute reported fraud targeting servicemember and veterans. The SVI also regularly liaises with Department of Defense, the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Labor, as well as nonprofits, professional associations, and law school clinics dedicated to serving our servicemember and veteran communities.
The Department of Justice, the Civil Rights Division, and the SVI are dedicated to its responsibilities to assist servicemembers and veterans. Since January 2017, the division has filed 23 SCRA complaints and entered into 21 consent decrees and settlement agreements providing $11 million in compensation to over 2,000 servicemembers, in addition to civil penalties. The division filed more SCRA lawsuits in fiscal year 2020 (eight) than in any prior fiscal year. Since the division assumed USERRA enforcement authority in 2004, it has filed 109 USERRA employment-related lawsuits and has favorably resolved 200 USERRA complaints either through consent decrees obtained in those suits or through facilitated private settlements. Since January 2017, the division has filed 10 complaints and resolved 34 claims through consent decree or settlement and has secured compensation to improperly reemployed or terminated servicemembers. Since UOCAVA was enacted in 1986, the division has filed over 50 lawsuits to enforce its terms. The division also has achieved many resolutions that did not require litigation to obtain the needed remedial actions by state officials. The division also has filed amicus briefs in litigation regarding UOCAVA to ensure that eligible military and overseas voters would have sufficient time to vote. Our partners in the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch have also had success in their work. For example, in August 2019 the branch indicted five individuals for coordinating a million-dollar scheme to target thousands of servicemembers and veterans.
In just the past year, SVI has organized multi-day training programs for AUSAs in order to create a nationwide network of enforcement network. SVI has also conducted over 50 trainings, presentations and other events directly to servicemembers and Judge Advocates since 2018, including 18 virtual trainings since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. SVI has also engaged in legislative and policy changes impacting servicemembers.
As a result of Congress’s action, and President Trump’s support, the important work of the SVI can continue as an integral part of the Civil Rights Division’s enforcement and outreach portfolio. The civil rights of our servicemembers, veterans, and their families are of utmost importance to the Civil Rights Division and the codification of the SVI’s role in our organization ensures our continued efforts to protect those who sacrifice so much to protect all of us.
Judge sentences St. Louis County man to 30 years in prison for production of child pornography chargesRead the Press Release
ST. LOUIS, MO – United States District Judge Rodney W. Sippel sentenced Zachary Hamby to 30 years in prison today after the 30-year-old Florissant, Missouri resident’s guilty plea to four counts of production of child pornography and two counts of attempted production of child pornography. Judge Sippel sentenced Hamby’s co-defendant, Heather McDorman, to 288 months in prison in October.
According to court documents, between February 1, 2018 and March 12, 2018, Hamby directed McDorman to take pornographic photographs of children in restrooms at South County Mall, Walmart, other area malls, park bathrooms and a church bathroom. McDorman, at the direction of co-defendant Hamby, also sexually abused a child and photographed and live-streamed some of the abuse for Hamby to view. The abuse was filmed using an iPhone, which had traveled in interstate commerce.
The St. Louis County Police Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated the case. Assistant United States Attorney Colleen Lang handled the case.
#####
Department of Justice Statement on Solarwinds UpdateRead the Press Release
The Department of Justice Spokesman Marc Raimondi issued the following statement:
"On Dec. 24, 2020, the Department of Justice’s Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) learned of previously unknown malicious activity linked to the global SolarWinds incident that has affected multiple federal agencies and technology contractors, among others. This activity involved access to the Department’s Microsoft O365 email environment.
After learning of the malicious activity, the OCIO eliminated the identified method by which the actor was accessing the O365 email environment. At this point, the number of potentially accessed O365 mailboxes appears limited to around 3-percent and we have no indication that any classified systems were impacted.
As part of the ongoing technical analysis, the Department has determined that the activity constitutes a major incident under the Federal Information Security Modernization Act, and is taking the steps consistent with that determination. The Department will continue to notify the appropriate federal agencies, Congress, and the public as warranted."
Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen Regarding the Overrunning of the U.S. Capitol BuildingRead the Press Release
Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen issued the following statement:
"The violence at our Nation’s Capitol Building is an intolerable attack on a fundamental institution of our democracy. From the outset, the Department of Justice has been working in close coordination with the Capitol Police and federal partners from the Interior Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and the National Guard, as well as the Metropolitan Police and other local authorities. Earlier this afternoon, the Department of Justice sent hundreds of federal law enforcement officers and agents from the FBI, ATF, and the U.S. Marshals Service to assist the Capitol Police in addressing this unacceptable situation, and we intend to enforce the laws of our land."
U.S. Government Collects $7 Million in Iranian Assets for Victims of Terrorism FundRead the Press Release
The Justice Department announced the United States has collected $7 million of Iranian funds that will be allocated to provide compensation to American victims of international state-sponsored terrorism.
The funds are the United States’ share of a civil forfeiture investigation that is part of the government’s pursuit of a complex international conspiracy which spanned the globe. The conspiracy’s purpose was to violate the United States imposed international economic sanctions regime on Iran and included several Iranian nationals and others, who fraudulently transferred approximately $1 billion worth of Iranian-owned funds to accounts around the world.
“The funds subject to today’s stipulation had been destined to benefit criminal actors who engaged in an elaborate scheme to violate U.S. sanctions against Iran, one of the world’s leading state sponsors of terrorism,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General David Burns of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “Thanks to assistance from our foreign partners and the combined efforts of the Criminal Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Alaska, the FBI, and the IRS, the forfeited funds will instead be used to directly compensate victims of state sponsors of terrorism.”
“I thank our law enforcement partners for their long-term and dedicated diligence in securing these funds for victims of state-sponsored terrorism,” said U.S. Attorney Bryan D. Schroder for the District of Alaska. “The United States also acknowledges and expressed appreciation for the cooperation of UAE authorities, the Dubai Police Department’s Anti-money Laundering and Financial Crimes Division and the Government of Ras al Khaimah, the Office of the Prosecutor General of Georgia, and the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office and Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Korea, without whom this resolution would not have been possible.”
“The FBI will aggressively pursue those who aid terrorist financiers and those who abuse the U.S. financial system in the process,” said Special Agent in Charge Robert Britt of the FBI’s Anchorage Field Office. “Due to the collaborative effort put forth by the FBI and our partners, it is with great satisfaction that a portion of these successfully forfeited funds will go to American victims of international state-sponsored terrorism.”
“IRS-CI special agents are experts at tracing the flow of funds and throughout this investigation their skills were on display,” said IRS-Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) Special Agent in Charge Justin Campbell. “We are pleased that victims of state sponsored terror will receive these funds, and we will continue working with our partners to unravel financial transactions that promote terrorism.”
Beginning in 2011 and continuing up to 2014, the conspirators, including three Iranian nationals and, allegedly, one U.S. citizen, defrauded South Korean banks by submitting false documents purporting to show that Iranian companies were doing legitimate business with Korean companies. Based on these false documents, the conspirators succeeded in unlawfully transferring approximately $1 billion worth of Iranian-owned funds out of South Korea and into the world’s financial markets.
The American who is an alleged conspirator, Kenneth Zong, was indicted in December 2016 in the District of Alaska, for 47 counts of violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and the Iranian Transaction and Sanctions Regulations (ITSR), providing unlawful services to the Government of Iran, conspiracy to commit money laundering, and money laundering. Kenneth Zong remains in South Korea, where he recently completed serving a sentence of longer than five years for violating Korean law as part of the same scheme.
The conspirators transferred the Iranian-owned funds to accounts worldwide, including to Anchorage, Alaska. In 2018, a federal judge sentenced Mitchell Zong (i.e. Kenneth Zong’s son) to two and a half years imprisonment for his role in laundering approximately $968,000 of Iranian-derived funds, knowing the funds came from his father’s illegal transactions with Iranian nationals. In a separate forfeiture civil action, Mitchell Zong and other members of his family were ordered to forfeit to the United States approximately $10 million in assets, which were purchased with funds traceable to Kenneth Zong’s 2011 illegal IEEPA activity in Seoul, South Korea.
In addition to the prosecutions of Kenneth Zong and Mitchell Zong, the U.S. Attorney’s Office filed a forfeiture complaint seeking to seize money held in a sovereign wealth fund in the United Arab Emirates. These funds, which are also traceable to the scheme, were part of a down-payment made by the Iranian co-conspirators for the purchase of a Sheraton Hotel in Tbilisi, Georgia in 2011 and 2012. The agreement announced today resolves that forfeiture case with a proposed order that $7 million be forfeited to the United States. The forfeiture case, Civil No. 3:20-cv-00126-JMK, was filed and remains pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska.
The $7 million will be allocated to the U.S. Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund, which Congress established to provide compensation to certain individuals who were injured in acts of international state-sponsored terrorism, including victims of the 1979 U.S. embassy hostage situation in Iran, among others.
The Justice Department commended the FBI and IRS-CI for the successful investigation.
The forfeiture case and the case against Mitchell and Kenneth Zong were litigated by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Steven Skrocki and Jonas Walker. Former Deputy Chief Woo S. Lee and Senior Trial Attorney Michael Olmsted of the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section handled the prosecution. The Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs provided valuable assistance in this matter.
An indictment is merely an allegation. A defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
For more information regarding the U.S. Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund, see U.S. VICTIMS OF STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM FUND (usvsst.com).
Michigan Restaurant and Strip Club Owner Sentenced to Two Years n Prison for Tax CrimesRead the Press Release
A Walled Lake, Michigan, business owner was sentenced today to two years in prison, announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division.
According to court statements and filings, Johni Semma owned Bayside Sports Bar & Grill (Bayside) and The Coliseum, an adult entertainment business. As the owner of Bayside, Semma was responsible for collecting and paying to the IRS Bayside’s employment taxes. From the first quarter of 2008 through the first quarter of 2015, however, Semma timely filed only two employment tax returns with the IRS, despite being obligated to file 29 such returns during this period. He also did not pay approximately $1.3 million in employment taxes that were due.
In 2012, Semma sold The Coliseum for approximately $5.9 million, but did not file an individual income tax return or pay taxes for that year. As a result he caused an additional tax loss of approximately $463,000 to the IRS.
Semma previously pleaded guilty on Aug. 28, 2019, to one count of employment tax fraud and one count of failure to file his individual income tax return.
In addition to the term of imprisonment, U.S. District Court Judge Paul D. Borman ordered Semma to pay $1,793,771 in restitution to the IRS.
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Zuckerman commended special agents of IRS-Criminal Investigation, who conducted the investigation, and Tax Division Trial Attorneys Kenneth Vert and Brittney Campbell, who prosecuted the case.
Additional information about the Tax Division and its enforcement efforts may be found on the division’s website.
Virginia Tax Preparer Sentenced to More Than Two Years in Prison for Preparing False ReturnsRead the Press Release
A Newport News, Virginia, tax return preparer was sentenced to 27 months in prison for preparing false tax returns, announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and U.S. Attorney G. Zachary Terwilliger for the Eastern District of Virginia.
According to court documents and statements made in court, Angela Harper owned At Ease Tax Services, a tax preparation business that she operated in her home and hotel rooms in the Newport News area. Between 2014 and 2018, Harper prepared tax returns that claimed fraudulent credits and deductions in an effort to inflate her clients’ refunds. Harper did not sign the returns in order to make it appear that the returns were self-prepared by her clients. She also did not review the completed returns with her clients, nor did she provide copies of the returns even when the clients specifically requested them. In total, Harper filed over 400 false tax returns and caused a tax loss of over $700,000 to the IRS.
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Zuckerman and U.S. Attorney Terwilliger commended special agents of IRS Criminal Investigation, who conducted the investigation, and Trial Attorney Francine Davis and Assistant Chief Michael Boteler of the Tax Division, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Samuels of the Eastern District of Virginia, who prosecuted the case.
Additional information about the Tax Division and its enforcement efforts may be found on the division’s website.
Ready-Mix Concrete Company Admits to Fixing Prices and Rigging Bids in Violation of Antitrust LawsRead the Press Release
Argos USA LLC, a producer and seller of ready-mix concrete headquartered in Alpharetta, Georgia, was charged with participating in a conspiracy to fix prices, rig bids, and allocate markets for sales of ready-mix concrete in the Southern District of Georgia and elsewhere, the Department of Justice announced today.
According to the one-count felony charge filed today in the U.S. District Court in Savannah, employees of Argos and other ready-mix concrete companies carried out the charged conspiracy by coordinating the issuance of price-increase letters to customers, allocating specific ready-mix concrete jobs in the coastal Georgia area, charging fuel surcharges and environmental fees, and submitting bids to customers at collusive and noncompetitive prices. The charged conspiracy began as early as 2010 and continued until about July 2016.
The Antitrust Division also announced a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) resolving the charge against Argos, under which the company agreed to pay a $20 million criminal penalty, admitted to participating in the charged conspiracy, and agreed to cooperate fully with the Antitrust Division’s ongoing criminal investigation and prosecution of others involved in this conspiracy. Under the DPA, Argos has also agreed to maintain a compliance and ethics program designed to prevent and detect antitrust violations and that meets certain elements specified in the DPA, and to conduct periodic reviews and submit annual reports to the division regarding the remediation and implementation of its compliance program. As part of the agreement, the parties will file a joint motion, which is subject to approval by the court, to defer for the term of the DPA any prosecution and trial of the charge filed against Argos.
“This resolution reflects the division’s dedication to holding accountable those who cheat American consumers out of competitively priced critical commercial products,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division. “Price fixing, market allocation, and bid rigging are not only unethical, but illegal. The division, along with its law enforcement partners, remains focused on prosecuting those responsible for this type of conduct.”
“There is no room in the Southern District of Georgia for companies attempting to inflate their profits by illegally colluding with would-be competitors at the expense of consumers,” said U.S. Attorney Bobby L. Christine for the Southern District of Georgia. “This agreement cements our dedication to eliminating such anti-competitive practices.”
“Activities related to collusion, bid rigging, and market allocation do not promote an environment conducive to open competition, which harms the consumer,” said Director Steven Stuller of the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General. “The U.S. Postal Service spends hundreds of millions of dollars on new construction, maintenance, and renovation of U.S. Postal Service facilities. Along with the Department of Justice and our federal law enforcement partners, the USPS Office of Inspector General will aggressively investigate those who would engage in this type of harmful conduct.”
“This announcement is yet another example of the FBI and our partners’ dedication to ensure a fair market for consumers,” said Assistant Director in Charge Steven M. D’Antuono of the FBI Washington Field Office. “The U.S. system of open and free markets for all consumers is built on trust and integrity. When a company such as Argos admits to a conspiracy to rig bids and fix prices at the expense of consumers, the integrity of the system is compromised. The FBI will doggedly pursue and investigate all allegations of corruption, by individuals and companies, that hinder consumers’ rights.”
Ready-mix concrete is a product comprised of ingredients including cement, aggregate (sand and gravel), water, and, at times, other additives. It is made on demand and, if necessary, delivered to work sites by concrete mixer trucks. Ready-mix concrete is purchased by do-it-yourself and commercial customers, as well as local, state, and federal governments, for use in various construction projects, including, but not limited to, sidewalks, driveways, bridges, tunnels, and roads.
Argos is the second company charged in this matter. An indictment was returned in September 2020 in the U.S. District Court in Savannah charging Evans Concrete LLC; John David Melton; Timothy Tommy Strickland; and former Argos employees James Clayton Pedrick and Gregory Hall Melton with participating in the same conspiracy. Pedrick was also charged with making false statements, and Strickland was charged with making false statements and perjury. Evans Concrete and the individuals are all awaiting trial.
In the DPA, Argos admitted to participating in the charged conspiracy from October 2011, when it acquired the assets of a ready-mix concrete supplier in the Southern District of Georgia and began employing Gregory Melton and James Pedrick, until July 2016. Gregory Melton was the division manager of ready-mix concrete sales for Argos’ local sales office in Pooler, Georgia. Pedrick was a cement salesperson, selling cement to ready-mix concrete suppliers.
Argos is charged with a violation of the Sherman Act, which 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.
The charge is the result of an ongoing investigation conducted by the Antitrust Division, the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General, and the FBI’s Washington Field Office, with the assistance of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Georgia and the U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General. Anyone with information on market allocation, price fixing, bid rigging, or other anticompetitive conduct in the ready-mix concrete industry should contact the Antitrust Division’s Citizen Complaint Center at 1-888-647-3258 or visit www.justice.gov/atr/contact/newcase.html.
Judge Sentences St. Louis Man to 20 Years for Drug-Related Murder and Conspiracy to Distribute FentanylRead the Press Release
ST. LOUIS, MO – United States District Judge Catherine D. Perry sentenced Armond Calvin to 240 months in prison today for one count of conspiracy to distribute fentanyl and one count of using a firearm to commit murder in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. Calvin, 22, of St. Louis City, previously pleaded guilty on October 5, 2020.
According to the plea agreement, Calvin was a member of a violent drug trafficking organization that distributed fentanyl and other illegal drugs to drug customers in the St. Louis Metropolitan area. Members of the organization maintained various cellular telephones, which drug customers would call to obtain fentanyl. Calvin and other members of the conspiracy shared the phones, taking turns distributing fentanyl to customers who called the phone numbers.
On December 3, 2016, Calvin and other gang members learned a prospective customer had purchased fentanyl from a rival drug dealer, instead of from Calvin’s drug trafficking organization. Calvin and other members of his gang then tracked the rival dealer’s vehicle to the area of the Meramec Market, near the intersection of Oregon Avenue and Meramec Street in the City of St. Louis. At that location, Calvin, armed with a Glock 27, .40 caliber firearm fitted with a laser sight, leaned out of his own vehicle’s window and opened fire on the rival vehicle, striking and killing the backseat occupant, victim David Leslie Bryant, III. As Calvin was shooting, a black knit hat fell off Calvin’s head and onto the street. Later forensic analysis revealed Calvin’s DNA on the hat. The Glock 27, .40 caliber firearm was recovered several months later following the crash of a vehicle in which Calvin was a passenger, and ballistics analysis confirmed it was the murder weapon.
This case was investigated and prosecuted in connection with the on-going U.S. Attorney’s Office Project Safe Neighborhoods Initiative and investigation into drug distribution at the Clinton-Peabody public housing complex. The investigation included the execution of more than 15 federal search warrants resulting in the seizure of numerous firearms and controlled substances and was the subject of an important public forum involving law enforcement, citizens, and residents of the Clinton-Peabody complex held on August 3, 2018, at the Peabody Elementary School.
This case was an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) investigation by the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, the St. Louis Division of the FBI, the St. Louis Division of the DEA, the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the United States Marshals Service, and the St. Charles County Sheriff’s Department, with assistance from the St. Louis Circuit Attorney’s Office. Assistant United States Attorneys Lisa Yemm and Angie Danis are handling the case for the United States Attorney’s Office.
#####
Fire Extinguisher Manufacturer Ordered to Pay $12 Million Penalty for Delay and Misrepresentations in Reporting Product DefectsRead the Press Release
A federal judge today ordered Walter Kidde Portable Equipment Inc. (Kidde) to pay a $12 million civil penalty in connection with allegations that the company failed to timely inform the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) about problems with fire extinguishers manufactured by the company, the Department of Justice announced.
Kidde, based in Mebane, N.C., agreed to the civil penalty and other terms as part of a consent decree entered by U.S. District Judge Loretta C. Biggs of the Middle District of North Carolina. The consent decree resolves allegations in a complaint filed by the United States against Kidde on December 30.
The complaint concerned Kidde fire extinguishers with plastic handles that were the subject of a recall announced by the CPSC and Kidde in 2017. According to the recall announcement, the fire extinguishers could fail to discharge during a fire emergency, and their nozzles could detach. A subset of the recalled fire extinguishers was the subject of an earlier recall in February 2015. The complaint alleged that Kidde violated the Consumer Product Safety Act by significantly underreporting prior to the first recall the scope and nature of the defect and risk, and the number of products and models affected. According to the complaint, Kidde also failed to immediately report to the CPSC information concerning nozzles detaching from fire extinguishers. The complaint further alleged that Kidde made misrepresentations to the CPSC and misused a registered safety certification mark.
“Companies must immediately report to the CPSC information about unreasonable risks and defects that create substantial hazards,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Bossert Clark of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The Department of Justice will continue to take appropriate enforcement actions against companies that jeopardize consumer safety by failing to comply with reporting requirements.”
“I want to convey my thanks to CPSC staff and to our partners at the Department of Justice for finalizing this consent decree without the need for extended litigation,” said CPSC Acting Chairman Robert S. Adler.
The court’s order requires Kidde to maintain a compliance program to ensure that the company complies with the Consumer Product Safety Act and to maintain internal controls and procedures designed to ensure timely, complete, and accurate reporting to the CPSC as required by law. Kidde is subject to liquidated damages if the company is not in compliance with the consent decree. In agreeing to the consent decree, Kidde did not admit that it violated the law.
The government is represented by Trial Attorneys Claude Scott and Daniel Zytnick of the Department of Justice Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch, with the assistance of Patricia Vieira of the CPSC’s Office of the General Counsel.
For more information about the Consumer Protection Branch, visit its website at http://www.justice.gov/civil/consumer-protection-branch.
Statement of the Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen on the Death of Former Attorney General Richard (Dick) ThornburghRead the Press Release
Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen released the following statement:
"Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen released the following statement: Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen released the following statement on the death of former Attorney General Richard (Dick) Thornburgh: It is with profound sadness that I learned of the passing of former Attorney General and Pennsylvania Governor Richard (Dick) L. Thornburgh. Gov. Thornburgh’s tenure at the Department of Justice started in 1969 in the Western District of Pennsylvania, where he served as the U.S. Attorney. He later led the Department’s Criminal Division before successfully running for Governor of Pennsylvania, where he served two terms as the Keystone state’s chief executive. In 1988, President Ronald Reagan appointed Gov. Thornburgh to serve as the U.S. Attorney General and he was retained as Attorney General by President George H.W. Bush. Gov. Thornburgh was widely respected as a brilliant lawyer, a true patriot and a model leader. He led the efforts on the Americans with Disabilities Act, launched campaign against white collar crime-- including a record number of cases against savings and loans and securities officials, and he actively pursued racial, religious and ethnic hate crimes. His contributions to the Nation, our Department and the legal profession are legendary and the memory of his contributions will live on for generations to come."
TriWest Healthcare Alliance Corp. Agrees to Pay $179.7 Million to Resolve Overpayments from the Department of Veterans AffairsRead the Press Release
WASHINGTON – TriWest Healthcare Alliance Corp. has agreed to pay the United States $179,700,000 to resolve claims that it received overpayments from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in connection with its administration of certain VA health care programs, the Department of Justice announced today.
TriWest, an Arizona corporation headquartered in Phoenix, is in the business of administering government health care programs, including those operated by the VA. TriWest is responsible for administering certain portions of the VA Patient-Centered Community Care Program (PC3) and the VA’s former Veterans Choice Program (Choice). Both programs have enabled veterans to obtain medical care from providers in their communities. As an administrator of these programs, TriWest is paid by the VA to coordinate medical appointments and make payments to health care providers.
The settlement resolves allegations that TriWest retained overpayments from the VA in connection with its administration of the PC3 and Choice Programs. The alleged overpayments included payments by the VA to TriWest twice for the same services as well as payments for services for which TriWest received full or partial reimbursement from certain health care providers.
“The VA’s PC3 and Choice Programs have provided significant benefits to our nation’s veterans,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Bossert Clark of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The department will continue to support the VA and its Office of Inspector General in ensuring that the VA’s programs are administered properly and that taxpayer funds are used as intended.”
“The VA provides invaluable assistance to those who have sacrificed on our behalf,” said U.S. Attorney Michael Bailey for the District of Arizona. “It is vital that those who administer programs for the VA be held accountable to do so with the utmost care and integrity.”
“The VA Office of Inspector General works tirelessly to promote the economy, efficiency, and integrity of the VA’s programs and operations,” said VA Inspector General Michael J. Missal. “This settlement is integral to ensuring that the VA’s funds are spent for the benefit of our nation’s veterans. I appreciate the teamwork and dedication that led to this significant recovery.”
The settlement was the result of a coordinated effort by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Arizona, the Department of Justice Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, and the VA and its Office of Inspector General. The claims resolved by the settlement agreement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.
Justice Department Settles with Indiana School District to Resolve Disability Discrimination Investigation into School Seclusion and Restraint PracticesRead the Press Release
The Justice Department today announced a settlement agreement with the North Gibson School Corporation in Princeton, Indiana, to address and prevent the discriminatory secluding and restraining of students with disabilities.
The agreement follows an investigation conducted under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) into a complaint that the school district inappropriately secluded and restrained students with emotional and behavioral disabilities in the district’s self-contained classrooms. The department’s investigation confirmed that students as young as five years old were secluded and restrained improperly and repeatedly, resulting in days, and sometimes weeks, of lost instructional time. The department also investigated allegations that the school district regularly and inappropriately sent these students home early from school, placed them on abbreviated school days, and assigned them to homebound instruction.
“Students with disabilities, like all students, belong in classrooms where they can learn — not locked away or otherwise segregated from their peers. When school districts improperly seclude or restrain students with disabilities, they inflict grievous harm on some of America’s most vulnerable children,” said Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband of the Civil Rights Division. “Students with emotional and behavioral disabilities need additional supports in the classroom, not practices that keep them out or subject them to isolation and trauma. We look forward to working with the North Gibson School Corporation as it implements this settlement agreement to provide students with disabilities equal access to education — a right guaranteed to them by the Americans with Disabilities Act.”
“We are better as a community when our schools serve all of our students,” said Acting U.S. Attorney John Childress for the Southern District of Indiana. “Our schools should be places where all children have the best chance to learn and grow and this agreement is a significant step toward achieving that goal.”
The school district cooperated fully throughout the investigation, voluntarily suspended its use of seclusion rooms before the investigation was completed and agreed to take the steps outlined in today’s settlement agreement.
Under the settlement agreement, the school district will take proactive steps to ensure that its practices do not discriminate against students with disabilities. The district will, among other things: change its policies to prohibit use of seclusion rooms; report all instances of restraint and review whether they were justified; take steps to avoid placing students with emotional and behavioral disabilities on an abbreviated school day or homebound instruction and document those steps; create and implement a procedure for handling complaints of disability discrimination; provide appropriate training and resources to help schools implement the agreement; and appoint an Intervention Coordinator to ensure the district’s compliance with the agreement and Title II of the ADA.
This year marks the 30th anniversary of the ADA. Enforcement of Title II of the ADA in schools is a priority of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department. Additional information about the Civil Rights Division is available on its website at www.justice.gov/crt, and additional information about the work of the Educational Opportunities Section is available at https://www.justice.gov/crt/educational-opportunities-section. Members of the public may report possible civil rights violations at https://civilrights.justice.gov/report/.
Statement by Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen on the Pakistani Proceedings Relating to the Abduction and Murder of Daniel PearlRead the Press Release
Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen has released the following statement:
“We understand that Pakistani authorities are taking steps to ensure that Omar Sheikh remains in custody while the Supreme Court appeal seeking to reinstate his conviction continues. The separate judicial rulings reversing his conviction and ordering his release are an affront to terrorism victims everywhere. We remain grateful for the Pakistani government’s actions to appeal such rulings to ensure that he and his co-defendants are held accountable. If, however, those efforts do not succeed, the United States stands ready to take custody of Omar Sheikh to stand trial here. We cannot allow him to evade justice for his role in Daniel Pearl’s abduction and murder.”
Justice Department Announces Closing of Investigation into 2014 Officer Involved Shooting in Cleveland, OhioRead the Press Release
The Justice Department announced today that the career prosecutors reviewing the independent federal investigation into the fatal shooting of Tamir Rice on Nov. 22, 2014, in Cleveland, Ohio, found insufficient evidence to support federal criminal charges against Cleveland Division of Police (CDP) Officers Timothy Loehmann and Frank Garmback. Yesterday the department notified counsel for Mr. Rice’s family of the decision and today sent a letter to Mr. Rice’s family explaining the findings of the investigation and reasons for the decision.
Applicable Law
The department examined the facts in this case under relevant federal criminal statutes. The federal criminal statute applicable to these facts is Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law. In order to proceed with a prosecution under Section 242, prosecutors must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that a law enforcement officer acted willfully to deprive an individual of a federally protected right. The right implicated in this matter is the Fourth Amendment right to be free from an unreasonable seizure. This right includes the right to be free from unreasonable physical force by police. To prove that a police shooting violated the Fourth Amendment, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the use of force was objectively unreasonable based on all of the surrounding circumstances. The law requires that the reasonableness of an officer’s use of force on an arrestee be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with added perspective of hindsight. The law set forth by the Supreme Court requires that allowances must be made for the fact that law enforcement officers are often forced to make split-second judgments in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving. Finally, caselaw establishes that an officer is permitted to use deadly force where he reasonably believes that the suspect posed an imminent threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others.
Additionally, to prove that a shooting violated section 242, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the officers acted willfully. This high legal standard – one of the highest standards of intent imposed by law – requires proof that the officer acted with the specific intent to do something the law forbids. It is not enough to show that the officer made a mistake, acted negligently, acted by accident or mistake, or even exercised bad judgment.
Although Tamir Rice’s death is tragic, the evidence does not meet these substantial evidentiary requirements. In light of this, and for the reasons explained below, career federal prosecutors with both the Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office concluded that this matter is not a prosecutable violation of the federal statutes.
Factual Overview
This summary is based on, and consistent with, all facts known to the government after a thorough examination, most of which are undisputed.
On Nov. 22, 2014, Tamir spent the majority of the day at the Cudell Park Recreation Center (CPRC). Throughout the day, Tamir was frequently seen playing with a toy black airsoft pistol with a removable magazine that was visually virtually indistinguishable from a real .45 Colt semi-automatic pistol. Tamir would periodically point the toy gun at individuals at the CPRC and at the adjoining playground.
At approximately 3:11 p.m., an individual made a “911” call to report that a “guy with a pistol” was pointing a gun at multiple people on the playground at the CPRC. The caller gave a detailed description of the individual, stated that he was “probably a juvenile,” and that the gun was “probably fake,” but he also described the scene as very frightening. On the date of the incident, Tamir was 12-years-old and stood 5’7” and 195 lbs.
A 911 dispatcher subsequently broadcast the call as a “Code 1” (the highest priority call) and Officers Garmback and Loehmann radioed that they would respond. The information the dispatcher relayed to Officers Garmback and Loehmann was “there’s a black male sitting on the swing. He’s wearing a camouflage hat, a gray jacket with black sleeves. He keeps pulling a gun out of his pants and pointing it at people.” The dispatcher did not relay that the individual might be a juvenile or that the gun might be fake. Thus, the officers believed that they were responding to a playground where a grown man was brandishing a real gun at individuals, presumably including children.
Video from the CPRC captured the subsequent events. It is important to note that the video footage is grainy, shot from a distance, does not show detail or perspective, and portions of the incident are not visible because of the location of the patrol car. Further, the time lapse footage captures approximately two frames per second at a variable rate, which is incapable of capturing continuous action.
Officers Garmback and Loehmann approached the CPRC’s playground area with a swing set, Tamir’s reported location. Tamir was not in the swing set area when the patrol car entered the park, but was sitting alone at a picnic table under the gazebo located west of the swing set. He matched the description of the suspect provided by the dispatcher. No other people were in the immediate area.
It is not clear from the video evidence when Tamir became aware of the patrol car driving toward the gazebo. Tamir stood up at the picnic table approximately 10 seconds before the shooting and over the course of the next three seconds, he walked around the end of the table in a semi-circle, so that he was facing in the general direction of the oncoming patrol car but not yet moving toward it. Meanwhile, the patrol car continued to approach the gazebo.
Tamir began walking forward toward the passenger side of the approaching patrol. Meanwhile, Officer Garmback applied the brakes in an attempt to stop the patrol car, but due to the wet conditions on the ground the car did not stop where he intended and instead slid forward approximately 40 feet. As the patrol car came to a stop a short distance from Tamir, who by that point had stopped moving forward and was stationary, Officer Loehmann exited the still moving patrol car. At that moment, it appears that Tamir made movements of some sort with both his left and right arms. The positioning of the moving arms suggests that Tamir’s hands were in the vicinity of his waist, but his hands are not visible in the video. Officer Loehmann fired two shots within less than two seconds of opening the passenger door, striking Tamir once in the abdomen.
As soon as Officer Loehmann exited the patrol car, he fell to his right and to the ground, toward the rear of the patrol car, resulting in an ankle injury. When Officer Loehmann got to his feet, he quickly moved to the rear driver’s side of the patrol car for cover while continuing to aim his drawn weapon in Tamir’s direction. Meanwhile, Officer Garmback exited the patrol car and began moving to the front of the vehicle, where he stood for approximately 15 seconds with his gun drawn and pointing in Tamir’s direction. Enhanced video stills show a dark object (the toy gun) appear on the floor of the gazebo within a few feet of Tamir approximately 7 seconds after the shooting, just as Officer Garmback reached the front of the patrol car and just after Tamir’s upper body moved to the ground (and out of view of the surveillance camera). Officer Garmback stood at the front of the patrol car for approximately 15 seconds with his gun drawn and pointed in the direction of Tamir, then moved into the gazebo and kicked the toy gun and magazine further away from Tamir.
After Officer Garmback kicked the toy gun and magazine into the grass, he reported the shots fired and requested emergency medical assistance.
Video Evidence
The CPRC has a number of surveillance cameras, and the incident is captured on video. Unfortunately, as previously discussed, this video is a time lapse video, has no audio, is grainy, shot from a significant distance, does not show detail or perspective, and portions of the incident are not visible because the incident occurred on the passenger side of the patrol car, and the camera is shooting from the driver’s side of the patrol car; thus, the patrol car blocks the camera’s view of parts of the activity during the relevant time. Tamir’s hands are not visible in the video during the relevant time.
The video generally shows that the patrol car came to a stop a short distance from Tamir, and that Officer Loehmann exited the still moving patrol car. At that moment, Tamir made movements of some sort with both his left and right arms. The positioning of the moving arms suggests that Tamir’s hands were in the vicinity of his waist, but his hands are not visible in the video and it cannot be determined from the video what he was doing. Officer Loehmann fired two shots within seconds of opening the passenger door, striking Tamir once in the abdomen.
Officer Statements
In on-scene statements to three responding law enforcement officers, starting approximately one minute after the shooting, Officer Loehmann repeatedly and consistently stated that Tamir was reaching for his gun just before Officer Loehmann shot. Officers Loehmann and Garmback gave several additional statements to other responding officers in the minutes and hours after the shooting. In those statements, both officers repeatedly and consistently stated that Officer Loehmann gave Tamir multiple commands to show his hands before shooting, and both officers repeatedly and consistently said that they saw Tamir reaching for his gun. Both officers submitted written statements concerning the incident approximately a year later, and repeated these seminal points. Officers Loehmann and Garmback are the only two witnesses in the near vicinity of the shooting.
Civilian Witnesses
Only one civilian witness reported seeing any part of the fatal encounter; an additional witness said that she heard shots and heard commands after the shots. However, the eyewitness’s two statements are inconsistent; the earwitness reported hearing three shots; both witnesses were approximately 315 feet away; and neither of them stated that they saw Tamir’s movements immediately preceding the shooting
Expert Witnesses
- Video Expert
An expert forensic video analyst analyzed the video evidence, which consists of compressed time lapse footage. He identified numerous technical variables that can result in the misinterpretation of the images by an untrained observer of compressed video images. He noted that the time lapse footage consists of a series of stills, with approximately two stills captured per second. In analyzing the relevant video footage in this case, the expert found that, throughout the two camera recordings, the refresh rate in which the video captures a new still image varies from approximately one image per second to up to eight images per second.[1] He further stated that there is no foundation to establish the precise timing from image to image. As a result, the video in this system is referred to as a ‘variable refresh rate recording.”
Thus, even when the video was enhanced to the still frames, there are unknown time gaps of up to a full second between each frame. The video and the corresponding still frames are incapable of capturing the nuances of continuous action.
- Use of Force Experts
Seven experts reviewed this case and opined on whether Officer Loehmann’s use of force was objectively reasonable or unreasonable: four of whom were hired by the CCPO and agreed that the shooting was objectively reasonable; three of whom were retained by the Rice family and agreed that the shooting was objectively unreasonable. Because the experts relied heavily on the poor-quality video of the incident and reached different conclusions about what it showed, their conflicting opinions added little to the case, other than to solidify the conclusion that the video evidence is not dispositive and is insufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt what Tamir was doing in seconds before he was shot.
Analysis Regarding a Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
In order to establish a federal civil rights violation, the government would have to prove that Officer Loehmann’s actions were unreasonable under the circumstances, and that his actions were willful. As noted above, caselaw establishes that an officer is permitted to use deadly force where he reasonably believes that the suspect posed an imminent threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others. Here, in light of the officers’ explanations that Officer Loehmann shot because it appeared to him that Tamir was reaching for his gun, the government would necessarily have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) Tamir was not reaching for his gun; and 2) that Officer Loehmann did not perceive that Tamir was reaching for his gun, despite his consistent statements to the contrary. The evidence is insufficient for the government to prove this.
To fully assess whether this shooting constituted an unreasonable use of force, career prosecutors closely examined, among other things, the evidence concerning the movement of Tamir’s arms and hands just prior to the shots. As mentioned, the video footage is of extremely poor quality and has gaps in time of up to one second. The footage does not establish that Tamir was drawing a weapon from his waistband; however, the footage also does not establish that Tamir was not reaching for a gun when Officers Loehmann and Garmback state that he was doing so.
The evidence in this case fails to definitively establish what happened at the time of the shooting. Both officers have consistently and repeatedly maintained that they saw Tamir reach for his gun. The toy gun was found on the ground near where Tamir fell, suggesting that it was on his person and that he handled it after standing up beside the picnic table. The video evidence is simply not definitive on Tamir’s movements at the relevant time. Multiple experts examined the grainy, non-continuous, indistinct video in which the patrol car blocks part of the view at the relevant time. Those experts differed in their opinion of what Tamir was “likely” doing with his arms and hands, but all agreed that his arms were moving and that his hands, though not visible, would have been in the general area of his waist. The experts’ opinions were of little assistance in assessing criminal guilt, because their analysis amounted to a 20/20 hindsight review of still frames from a non-continuous video that could not, and does not, capture all that happened in the relevant time period of approximately two seconds, but nevertheless portrays Tamir’s hands in the vicinity of his waist just prior to the shooting. Further, the civilian witnesses shed little light on Tamir’s actions just before he was shot.
Based on this evidence and the high burdens of the applicable federal laws, career prosecutors have concluded that there is insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Tamir did not reach for his toy gun; thus, there is insufficient evidence to establish that Officer Loehmann acted unreasonably under the circumstances.
As noted above, in analyzing a potential charge under 18 U.S.C. § 242, federal investigators must also consider whether the evidence proves the statutory element of willfulness — meaning, that, in shooting Tamir, Officer Loehmann knew what he was doing was wrong and chose to do it anyway. As noted above, an accident, a mistake, an officer’s misperception, or even an officer’s poor judgment or negligence does not constitute willful conduct that can be prosecuted under this statute.
Even if the government were to accept entirely the conclusions of the expert who opined that Tamir had his hands in his jacket pockets as he approached the patrol car, prosecutors would still be unable to disprove Officer Loehmann’s consistent statements regarding his own perceptions of Tamir’s movements. Within a minute of the shooting and with no opportunity to reflect, view video, or discuss the matter with others, Officer Loehmann said that he fired in self-defense and had no choice. He has given multiple additional statements, in which he has consistently maintained that he shot because he believed that Tamir was drawing a weapon; there is insufficient evidence to refute that central point.
Similarly, Officer Garmback has maintained since moments after the shooting that he heard Officer Loehmann give repeated commands to Tamir to show his hands, and that he saw Tamir reaching for a weapon in his waistband. Both officers sought cover from the patrol car, held Tamir at gunpoint for approximately 15 seconds, and generally responded to the incident in a manner consistent with their stated belief that Tamir was drawing a gun.
For many of the same reasons the evidence is insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the shooting violated the Fourth Amendment, the evidence is also insufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the officers acted willfully. Even if federal prosecutors could definitively prove that Tamir did not in fact reach toward his waistband to draw his toy gun, the government could not establish that Officer Loehmann did not perceive that Tamir did so.
Analysis Regarding Obstruction of Justice
Career federal prosecutors also reviewed the evidence to determine whether there was sufficient evidence to prove that Officers Loehmann and/or Garmback obstructed justice in their statements to law enforcement officers. These career prosecutors concluded that it did not.
In order to prove obstruction, the government would have to prove the officers knowingly made false statements, and that they did so with the intent to obstruct a federal investigation. As previously noted, the officers each gave multiple statements to law enforcement officers on the day of the incident, starting within a minute or so of the incident, without time to reflect, discuss, or view video. They each provided a written statement approximately a year later. Some of their statements are more detailed than others, and with slightly different verbiage, but all of which were generally consistent, particularly on the seminal facts. As the experienced career prosecutors who reviewed this matter know, when witnesses give multiple statements, there are almost always inconsistencies due to the fallibility of the human memory.
Because there is insufficient evidence to establish that the statements by Officers Loehmann and Garmback are in fact untrue, there is also insufficient evidence to establish that they knew them to be untrue or that they made them with the intent to obstruct the investigation.
Conclusion
In sum, after extensive examination of the facts in this tragic event, career Justice Department prosecutors have concluded that the evidence is insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Officer Loehmann willfully violated Tamir Rice’s constitutional rights, or that Officers Loehmann or Garmback obstructed justice. In this case, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Ohio, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, and the FBI each devoted significant time and resources to examine the circumstances surrounding Tamir Rice’s death and to completing a thorough analysis of the evidence gathered. The Justice Department remains committed to investigating allegations of excessive force by law enforcement officers and will continue to devote the resources required to ensure that all serious allegations of civil rights violations are thoroughly examined. The department aggressively prosecutes criminal civil rights violations whenever there is sufficient evidence to do so.
[1] For comparison, most modern video captures approximately 60 frames per second.