VIRGINIA STATE BAR DISCLOSURE: EVERY CASE IS DIFFERENT AND THE OUTCOME OF THIS OR ANY OTHER CASE DEPENDS ON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO THAT CASE. THE OUTCOME OF ANY CASE IS NEVER CERTAIN OR GUARANTEED.
Late yesterday afternoon the Department of Justice announced a settlement in one of my cases, United States ex rel. Chao v. Calnet, Inc., et al. The news was quickly picked up by Marjorie Censer at the Washington Post.
I would like to thank the Department of Justice’s Civil Division (Commercial Litigation Branch); the Defense Criminal Investigative Service; the Defense Contract Audit Agency, and last but definitely not least the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia.
And, I am happy to report, the case settled on the strength of the allegations in the relator’s First Amended and Supplemental Complaint filed in August of 2010. The case was originally filed in 2009–as a result of the complexity of the allegations it took a little longer than most qui tam cases filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
As an aside, the March 2009 amendments to the federal False Claims Act were important to this case, as it dealt with overpayments, long a favorite topic of mine.
___________________________________________________________________
Alexandria, Virginia, June 1, 2012—Calnet Inc. will pay $18.1 million dollars to settle allegations that it systematically overbilled the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command (“INSCOM”) for translation and other support services on three different contracts, according to a federal False Claims Act case unsealed today in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
The settlement resolves a lawsuit filed in August of 2009 under the qui tam provisions of the federal False Claims Act by former Calnet employee Kimthy Chao. Mr. Chao was represented by Virginia lawyer Zachary Kitts and K&G Law Group, PLLC.
The qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act allow any individual with non-public knowledge of fraud on the Government to file suit on their own behalf, as well as on behalf of the Government.
“This case demonstrates that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia and the Department of Justice will not shy away from complex procurement fraud cases,” Kitts said.
This settlement was the result of a coordinated effort by the Department of Justice, Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch; the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia; the Defense Criminal Investigative Service and the Defense Contract Audit Agency.
“Contractors are expected to comply with their statutory obligations and act in good faith when dealing with the United States government,” said Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice’s Civil Division. “We will not tolerate false statements and failure to disclose information that is important to the government’s contracting processes.”
