United States of America ex rel. Uri Bassan v. Omnicare, Inc.

Document and posture

The provided text is a July 13, 2020 letter from lawyers for Omnicare, Inc. and CVS Health Corporation to Chief Judge Colleen McMahon. It responds to motions by relators—private parties who bring False Claims Act cases on behalf of the government—to stay, or pause, their state-law claims while related federal False Claims Act claims proceed. The text does not include a court order or state that the court granted or denied the motions.

Background

Uri Bassan filed the first case in 2015. The letter says Bassan asserted claims under the federal False Claims Act and similar laws of 30 states, alleging that Omnicare obtained reimbursement for prescription drugs dispensed without valid prescriptions. The case remained sealed for more than four years while the government investigated the allegations.

Arash Mohajer and Christopher C. Peterson later filed a related case asserting a materially identical federal claim. In December 2019, the federal government intervened to pursue the federal claims. The letter says the states, except Indiana, informed the court that they would not intervene in Bassan’s state-law claims. Mohajer and Peterson later amended their complaint to add claims under 25 state False Claims Acts.

Omnicare’s arguments

Omnicare had moved to dismiss the complaints. As described in the letter, Omnicare argued that Bassan failed to plead with the particularity required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) that false claims were submitted to the states, that the claims were false, that the required intent existed, or that the alleged falsehoods mattered to the states. Omnicare raised similar arguments against Mohajer and Peterson and also argued that their claims violated state-law first-to-file rules, public-disclosure bars, and mandatory-sealing requirements.

Omnicare argued that a stay would not avoid the analysis required for the federal claims because those claims also involved state-specific pharmacy laws. It further argued that the state claims were based on the same conduct as the federal claims, that a stay would delay resolution, and that Omnicare would face the expense and reputational effects of keeping related fraud allegations pending.

Disposition

No disposition appears in the provided text. The letter asks the court to deny the motions to stay, but it does not establish that Judge Colleen McMahon granted, denied, or otherwise resolved them.