Author Archives: Staff

06/15/11 – Dodd-Frank Act critics have traditionally argued that whistleblowers directly complain against their company to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) instead of using internal compliance programs because of the monetary bounties involved.  To appease these critics, the SEC’s new procedures offer employees greater sums if they go through internal corporate channels first and lesser if they do not.  While monetary rewards do provide an incentive to whistle blow, recent research by a University of San Diego law professor shows that certain protections to the whistleblower can be just as important to some employees.  Accordingly, corporate internal programs need to understand the motivations of their employees rather than assume it’s all about the money.

Read more: http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2011/06/15/how-to-encourage-the-right-kind-of-whistleblowers/

06/07/11 – Mainstream media outlets have been inspired by the success of Wikileaks in obtaining information.  Al-Jazeera, and the Wall Street Journal have launched Al-Jazeera Transparency Unit (AJTU) and SafeHouse, respectively, to allow whistleblowers to confidentially share documents with the news sources.  Both sites assure that users’ information will be securely kept and not misused.  However, through the usage of broad language, they both reserve the right to disclose information to law enforcement.  Furthermore, both SafeHouse and AJTU disclaim all promises of confidentiality, anonymity, and security.

Read more: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/06/wsj-and-al-jazeera-lure-whistleblowers-false

06/06/11 – A Washington federal court ruled that the statute of limitations for bringing a federal False Claims Act against Washington D.C. is three years.  While in 2010 Congress decided on a three-year deadline for bringing a Federal False Claim, an earlier version of the Act did not have a timeframe.  The case in question was brought in 2002.  The court noted that in the absence of a statute of limitation in the federal law, courts borrowed from the most appropriate state law, which in this case was the D.C. False Claims Act.    

Read more:  http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2011/06/judge-affirms-3-year-limit-for-federal-false-claims-acts-against-dc-.html

06/01/11 –  In a period of intense activity, as Inspector General Daniel R. Levinson calls it, the Office of Inspector General (OIG), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that it expects to recover $3.4 billion.  The receivables, which are related to investigations, audits, and other reviews (mainly of Medicare and Medicaid) during the period October 2010 through March 2011, consist of $3.2 billion from 349 criminal and 179 civil actions and about $222 million from audits.  These numbers include settlements by two major drug companies for false claims, marketing, and other alleged violations.  GlaxoSmithKline LLC agreed to pay $750 million to resolve charges while Allergan, Inc. agreed to pay $600 million.

Read more:  http://oig.hhs.gov/newsroom/news-releases/2011/sar_release.asp

5-23-11 –  For over 150 years, when a company lies about its product being patented, a consumer can sue them and share the fine that the court imposes for lying to the government.  In other words, patent law has been allowing for qui tam law suits.  A small part of the pending patent reform bill, “America Invents Act of 2011”, eliminates the right of consumers to go after lying corporations, thus disallowing a powerful tool of the people – the qui tam suit.  The anti-false marking law in this Act would only allow false marking lawsuits filed by the US government or by a competitor who can prove competitive injury.

Read more:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-b-ravicher/companies-that-lie-to-the_1_b_865737.html