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

Nature of the document

The provided text is a letter from Omnicare’s counsel requesting discovery relief, together with a court endorsement. It is not a full decision on the requested relief.

Omnicare’s requests

Omnicare asked the court to order the United States to produce approximately 200 documents concerning proposed but rejected audits, referred to in the letter as “RAC” audits. The United States had withheld those documents under the deliberative-process privilege, a protection for certain confidential government discussions about policies and decisions.

Omnicare argued that the United States had changed its position by allowing Ilina Chaudhuri, a lawyer and the government’s representative under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6), to testify about the methodology and rejection of a proposed RAC audit. Omnicare contended that fairness required the government to produce related documents because it had disclosed information about the same deliberations while continuing to withhold the documents.

Omnicare also asked for a short remote deposition of Chaudhuri about how she prepared for her testimony. The letter states that Chaudhuri first testified that an email was the source of information for her testimony, but that the government later said she was mistaken and had instead received information from unidentified government counsel. Omnicare argued that this prevented it from meaningfully questioning her about the basis and reliability of her testimony.

Earlier discovery rulings described in the letter

The letter says that the court had previously rejected many of the government’s deliberative-process claims but had allowed the government to continue withholding documents related to proposed but rejected RAC audits. The letter also says that an appeal of that earlier order remained pending. These descriptions concern earlier proceedings and are not the ruling reflected in the provided endorsement.

Court action reflected in the text

The endorsement dated April 22, 2024 states that Motion ECF No. 458 would be added to the scope of a conference scheduled for May 1, 2024. It also states that motions at ECF Nos. 429, 449, and 458 would be discussed at that conference.

The provided text does not state that the court granted, denied, or granted in part and denied in part Omnicare’s requests. It therefore does not resolve whether the documents must be produced or whether Chaudhuri’s deposition will be reopened. Judge Colleen McMahon’s court took only the scheduling action shown in the endorsement.