Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
During the nomination hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 15th, then United States Attorney General nominee William Barr backpedaled on earlier statements he had made about the False Claims Act being “an abomination.” Instead he testified that, with Barr at its helm, the Department of Justice would continue to vigorously enforce the statute. But recent actions by the DOJ suggest that although the DOJ may continue to prosecute certain relators’ FCA cases, other relators may find themselves on the other side of a government motion to dismiss. For corporations facing not only treble damages but millions of dollars in attorneys’ fees spent on defending against FCA cases, this may be viewed as welcome relief. In FY 2018 alone the DOJ collected over $2 billion from qui tams. Indeed, many companies find themselves embroiled in multiple FCA cases at a time. Most of the qui tams over the last few years have been in the healthcare industry. Now that military spending is ramping up, the expectation is qui tams in the defense industry will also increase.
*May exclude premium content
By Robert J. Anello and Richard F. Albert
By undoing some of the higher profile policy changes of the prior administration that many perceived as business-friendly, the current administration has served notice on the business and financial community of a return to practices characteristic of a more aggressive enforcement regime.
By Veeral Gosalia
Major crisis events, such as political uprisings or financial downturns, are typically followed by an increase in fraud in the business sector and heightened risk to corporate IP and other sensitive information. Anecdotally, this seems to be proving out again in the recent and ongoing fallout from the pandemic. Even before this Great Resignation movement, corporations across the globe were reporting increases in suspicious activity, data leakage, IP theft and other data risks stemming from departing employees and remote workers.
By Nola B. Heller and Samson Enzer
This article discusses the potential criminal and civil penalties that companies can face if their employees engage in insider trading in digital assets, and suggests several measures that exchanges can take to reduce their exposure from such risks.
By David Saunders and Julian L. André
The past 12 months have seen a steady drumbeat of action by federal law enforcement and regulatory agencies of which in-house counsel should take note. Whether new guidance, regulation, investigations, or enforcement activity, the message is clear: The federal government is paying close attention to how companies are handling and protecting their data — especially consumer and sensitive data.