False Claims Act Settlement Agreement

The Relateur argues that the settlement of civil action claims is fair, appropriate and appropriate in all circumstances, in accordance with 31 U.S.C s. 3730 (c) (2) (B). The United States undertakes to pay C. Jack Dowden, within a reasonable period of time after receiving such a payment by the United States, the sum of five million nine hundred and seventy thousand dollars ($5,970,000) from the payment described in paragraph 1. After receiving this payment, C. Jack Dowden for himself, his heirs, successors and beneficiaries of the assignment to the United States of all claims pursuant to 31 U.S. states. C released and unloaded forever. This agreement does not resolve any claims that the United States has or may have against the Relateur arising from Title 26, U.S. Code (Internal Revenue Code) or claims arising from that agreement. “This transaction agreement and the payment described here are neither an admission of liability on the part of the [defendants], nor a concession from the United States that their claims are unfounded, nor a concession from the Relateur that his claims are unfounded. In order to avoid delays, uncertainties, inconveniences and delays in lengthy litigation, the parties agree on the following. Rose- Kiernan, Inc., the binder used by Northland and Diverse, also entered into a transaction agreement with DOJ, although he was not named as a defendant in the Qui tam cases.

The press release states that the transaction agreement “resolved allegations that Rose-Kiernan knew or ought to know that Diverse and Northland were bound in violation of SBA rules and that these companies took steps to conceal their government membership, to obtain and obtain payments for state dismantling contracts.” Rose-Kiernan was held liable under the ACF for its alleged support for various obligations for Diverse, which doJ considered a “critical measure to encourage Various and Northland`s fraud against the government,” and served as a key factor in ensuring that various false payment rights were submitted to the United States. B. The company may, depending on the circumstances, take steps to ensure that it is not suspended or suspended because of the comparison or the allegations on which it was based. If this is desirable, the company should consider reaching a preliminary agreement with the DOJ on the amount, allegations, etc., and then contact the appropriate suspension/blocking authority before the agreement is signed.

Posted in Uncategorized