DUSA Inc. Settles FCA Lawsuit for $20m

Whistleblower News

DUSA Pharmaceuticals, Inc. has agreed to pay the U.S. $20.75 million to settle a lawsuit filed under the whistleblower provision of the False Claims Act. DUSA, a subsidiary of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., was accused of knowingly promoting a topical drug administration schedule program that resulted in fraudulent billings to Medicare and the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program. DUSA encouraged the drug administration program, which was neither approved within the FDA product instructions nor verified by sufficient clinical data, by offering prescribers paid speaker positions and programs, providing false or misleading information, and promotion by the company sales team. The U.S. alleged that senior officials of DUSA and Sun Pharma were aware that the new administration schedule resulted in significantly lower clearance rates for the indicated health condition, and that pushing the schedule “undermine[d] the health of patients and the financial integrity of federal health care programs.” The whistleblower and relator, a former sales representative of DUSA, will receive $3.5 million as part of the case’s resolution.

Learn more here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/dusa-pharmaceuticals-pay-us-2075-million-settle-false-claims-act-allegations-relating

What is Qui Tam?

Whistleblower Questions

In its simplest form, a qui tam lawsuit is brought by a citizen, known as a “relator” or whistleblower, against a company, person or entity, that he or she knows is cheating the federal or a state government in some way. Since the qui tam suit is brought in the name of the relator on behalf of the government, the government may actually join the case and litigate alongside the relator’s lawyers. Through this web site you can educate yourself on the process, the law, your rights and protection and contact a lawyer who can help advise you. You can also learn about other laws including those administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that allow whistleblowers to seek redress on behalf of the government.

Oral Roberts University, $300,000

Elizabeth Shofner, Justin Brooks Articles, Reuben Guttman Articles, Successes, Traci Buschner Articles

United States ex rel. Shoe v. Oral Roberts University,
District of South Carolina.

GBB attorney’s brought this False Claims Act case against Oklahoma based ORU alleging that the university had fraudulently billed the Department of Education after violating the federal ban on incentive-based compensation. The whistleblower contended that ORU hired Shoe Inc., a student recruiting firm, then paid them with a portion of the tuitions of recruited students. Title IV of the higher education act prohibits any university receiving federal student aid from compensating recruiters based on the number of students successfully recruited. Maurice Shoe, the whistleblower and co-owner of Shoe, was awarded $45,000. 

Boeing Company, $40 million

Dan Guttman Articles, Reuben Guttman Articles, Successes, Traci Buschner Articles

US Ex Rel. Roby v. Boeing Co.,
Southern District of Ohio.

Firm attorneys represented the relator in this False Claims Act suit alleging that the Boeing Company defrauded the US Government by manufacturing and selling the Army helicopters with defective parts. The Government contends that Boeing used faulty transmission gears that resulted in the crash of two helicopters and more than $20 million in damages and government expenses. The nature of this case is closely aligned with the original purpose of the False Claims Act; passed in 1863 it was enacted with the intention of preventing large corporate contractors from defrauding the US Army and Government. 

North Greenville University, $2.5 million

Elizabeth Shofner, Justin Brooks Articles, Reuben Guttman Articles, Successes, Traci Buschner Articles

United States ex rel. Shoe v. North Greenville University,
District of South Carolina.

Firm attorneys pursued a False Claims Act suit against North Greenville University, alleging NGU illegally submitted student aid claims to the government after providing incentive compensation to student recruiters. Title IV of the Higher Education Act makes it a crime for higher education institutions which receive federal student aid money to provide recruiters with commissions, bonuses, or other forms of incentive compensation for recruiting new students. The complaint against NGU accusing of paying a recruitment company which it partially owned, Joined Inc., based on the number of new students their recruiters enrolled.

1 … 6 7 8 9 10 … 62