1
00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:03,440
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Werkin's arrest in early February was a stunner. The

2
00:00:03,480 --> 00:00:06,320
Speaker 1: former Justice Department attorney was accused of trying to sell

3
00:00:06,400 --> 00:00:09,760
Speaker 1: a confidential lawsuit filed by a whistleblower to the company

4
00:00:09,800 --> 00:00:12,880
Speaker 1: being targeted. He was arrested in a Silicon Valley hotel

5
00:00:12,880 --> 00:00:15,680
Speaker 1: lobby where he was using a false name, wearing a wig,

6
00:00:16,040 --> 00:00:19,159
Speaker 1: and carrying a seal, allegedly carrying a sealed complaint that

7
00:00:19,239 --> 00:00:22,200
Speaker 1: he was planning to sell for three ten thousand dollars.

8
00:00:22,720 --> 00:00:25,440
Speaker 1: A new Bloomberg News story says FBI agents are now

9
00:00:25,480 --> 00:00:28,720
Speaker 1: asking questions at the Justice Department, trying to determine how

10
00:00:28,760 --> 00:00:31,720
Speaker 1: Wortkin got the complaint and whether he sold other secrets

11
00:00:31,760 --> 00:00:35,440
Speaker 1: while working at the Department's Medicare fraud unit. Wortkin has

12
00:00:35,520 --> 00:00:37,640
Speaker 1: yet to enter a plea, and his lawyer has declined

13
00:00:37,680 --> 00:00:41,120
Speaker 1: to comment with us to talk about the case. David Stone,

14
00:00:41,240 --> 00:00:44,960
Speaker 1: senior managing partner of the law firm Stone and Man,

15
00:00:45,520 --> 00:00:49,599
Speaker 1: I'm gonna mess this up. David Man man Ganini and

16
00:00:49,640 --> 00:00:53,080
Speaker 1: Nola J. Hitchcock Cock Cross, managing attorney at the Cross

17
00:00:53,159 --> 00:00:57,120
Speaker 1: Law Firm. I'm having less trouble pronouncing that. Welcome to you, both,

18
00:00:57,240 --> 00:01:00,440
Speaker 1: David H. Let's start with you tell us why this

19
00:01:00,520 --> 00:01:03,400
Speaker 1: complaint that work Can is accused of trying to sell

20
00:01:03,880 --> 00:01:08,319
Speaker 1: was under seal in the first place. Well, Um, the

21
00:01:08,360 --> 00:01:12,440
Speaker 1: False Claims Act, which is a federal statute, provides that

22
00:01:12,600 --> 00:01:16,080
Speaker 1: private individuals who blow the whistle on fraud against the

23
00:01:16,160 --> 00:01:19,440
Speaker 1: government can bring cases on behalf of the government. But

24
00:01:19,520 --> 00:01:22,640
Speaker 1: those cases must be filed under seal in order to

25
00:01:22,640 --> 00:01:26,240
Speaker 1: give the government the opportunity to investigate the case and

26
00:01:26,280 --> 00:01:29,000
Speaker 1: determine whether they want to proceed with the case or not.

27
00:01:29,920 --> 00:01:33,440
Speaker 1: And the statute requires that the case be kept under

28
00:01:33,480 --> 00:01:36,720
Speaker 1: seal for at least sixty days, although it can be

29
00:01:37,080 --> 00:01:41,440
Speaker 1: extended for good cause, and often is extended for good cause. So, Nola,

30
00:01:41,560 --> 00:01:45,440
Speaker 1: there's a lot of secrecy surrounding the Justice Department lawyers

31
00:01:45,560 --> 00:01:50,279
Speaker 1: investigating the whistle blower claims. Where could he have gotten

32
00:01:50,280 --> 00:01:56,840
Speaker 1: the information besides from another colleague. Well, let me first

33
00:01:56,920 --> 00:02:00,040
Speaker 1: say there's a couple of other reasons for the you

34
00:02:00,160 --> 00:02:03,160
Speaker 1: and why it's very important and particularly also why it's

35
00:02:03,200 --> 00:02:09,359
Speaker 1: important to relators, um, because when the relators file the complaint, UM,

36
00:02:09,480 --> 00:02:14,560
Speaker 1: oftentimes are the people who are the whistleblowers right, sometimes

37
00:02:14,560 --> 00:02:18,200
Speaker 1: called whistleblowers. Under the statutes, they're called relators. Yes, those

38
00:02:18,200 --> 00:02:22,280
Speaker 1: are the whistleblowers. And and very frequently the whistleblowers are

39
00:02:22,320 --> 00:02:27,600
Speaker 1: current employees. So a very important reason for this seal

40
00:02:27,760 --> 00:02:30,800
Speaker 1: process under the statue, which is highly unusual in any

41
00:02:31,200 --> 00:02:35,360
Speaker 1: federal law, is is to protect the identity of the

42
00:02:35,400 --> 00:02:39,519
Speaker 1: whistleblowers themselves, of their laders exactly. And and and another reason

43
00:02:39,560 --> 00:02:44,000
Speaker 1: which is extremely important to the government is UM that

44
00:02:44,160 --> 00:02:47,560
Speaker 1: because of the first to file rule UM, when a

45
00:02:47,600 --> 00:02:51,200
Speaker 1: whistleblower is filing such a complaint, they have no knowledge

46
00:02:51,200 --> 00:02:54,480
Speaker 1: whether twenty other people have already filed, and in fact

47
00:02:54,520 --> 00:02:57,760
Speaker 1: they will not be entitled to any UM share in

48
00:02:57,840 --> 00:03:01,679
Speaker 1: any recovery. And yet they, because of the seal process,

49
00:03:01,760 --> 00:03:04,640
Speaker 1: they provide all of their information as a government, giving

50
00:03:04,680 --> 00:03:09,080
Speaker 1: the government an opportunity to get multiple UM whistleblowers to

51
00:03:09,160 --> 00:03:13,160
Speaker 1: provide information. UM. He had to the access to the

52
00:03:13,200 --> 00:03:18,320
Speaker 1: complaints UM. The UM he was not a Department of

53
00:03:18,400 --> 00:03:22,840
Speaker 1: Justice employee at the time of the alleged act UM

54
00:03:22,919 --> 00:03:28,079
Speaker 1: he was until I believe April of two thousand sixteen, UM.

55
00:03:28,120 --> 00:03:31,520
Speaker 1: And there have been some reports that UM, you know,

56
00:03:31,919 --> 00:03:37,680
Speaker 1: speculations that he may have taken UM other UM complaints

57
00:03:37,720 --> 00:03:41,160
Speaker 1: that he was working on. UM. One question for the

58
00:03:41,200 --> 00:03:43,520
Speaker 1: Department of Justice there would be whether there's a fire

59
00:03:43,760 --> 00:03:48,520
Speaker 1: firewall and UM, what access there would be generally to

60
00:03:49,000 --> 00:03:52,360
Speaker 1: to all of them that are filed. David, how did

61
00:03:52,400 --> 00:03:55,200
Speaker 1: let's talk about the Jeffrey Working case in particular, how

62
00:03:55,240 --> 00:03:58,960
Speaker 1: how did he come to the attention of UH, the

63
00:03:59,040 --> 00:04:03,040
Speaker 1: FBI and the first place. So what happened in this

64
00:04:03,080 --> 00:04:06,680
Speaker 1: case is that jeff we war Getten, who was formerly

65
00:04:07,360 --> 00:04:09,560
Speaker 1: a member of the Department of Justice and worked on

66
00:04:09,600 --> 00:04:13,360
Speaker 1: these cases and therefore had access to these cases, but

67
00:04:13,720 --> 00:04:17,240
Speaker 1: had left the Department and was now a partner in

68
00:04:17,279 --> 00:04:21,080
Speaker 1: a in a well known law firm, UM private law firm,

69
00:04:21,120 --> 00:04:26,880
Speaker 1: contacted an individual at one of the defendants UH that

70
00:04:26,960 --> 00:04:29,600
Speaker 1: was a defendant under this False Claims Act case that

71
00:04:29,680 --> 00:04:33,719
Speaker 1: was under seal, and offered to give them information about

72
00:04:33,760 --> 00:04:36,880
Speaker 1: the case, give them a copy of the sealed complaint

73
00:04:37,279 --> 00:04:41,040
Speaker 1: which they wouldn't otherwise have access to. And that individual

74
00:04:41,080 --> 00:04:46,000
Speaker 1: apparently contacted the FBI, and the FBI carried out a

75
00:04:46,000 --> 00:04:50,600
Speaker 1: sting operation. So, Nola, they're going to have to be

76
00:04:50,920 --> 00:04:55,000
Speaker 1: reviewing his cases, and how will that affect his cases

77
00:04:55,080 --> 00:05:00,240
Speaker 1: and the other cases in the office well, like I

78
00:05:00,000 --> 00:05:03,160
Speaker 1: I indicated, there may need to be a review beyond

79
00:05:03,279 --> 00:05:07,800
Speaker 1: what cases were signed to him, depending upon what firewall

80
00:05:07,880 --> 00:05:10,560
Speaker 1: may have been in place and what access UM in

81
00:05:10,640 --> 00:05:15,600
Speaker 1: the investigative UM attorney in the Department of Justice would

82
00:05:15,600 --> 00:05:19,000
Speaker 1: have had. UM. You know, he may have had access

83
00:05:19,040 --> 00:05:21,760
Speaker 1: to a larger kind of play. But I do want

84
00:05:21,760 --> 00:05:24,600
Speaker 1: to emphasize, though, and going over this, that this is

85
00:05:24,640 --> 00:05:27,800
Speaker 1: such an aberration and so shocking to everyone because of

86
00:05:27,839 --> 00:05:32,760
Speaker 1: the exceedingly high level of professionalism that we experience as

87
00:05:32,839 --> 00:05:36,599
Speaker 1: related council with SIBIL or counsel um with the Department

88
00:05:36,640 --> 00:05:39,599
Speaker 1: of Justice. David, do you do you agree with that?

89
00:05:39,760 --> 00:05:43,159
Speaker 1: Have you seen anything like this before. I've never seen

90
00:05:43,160 --> 00:05:46,719
Speaker 1: anything like this before, and there was you know, well,

91
00:05:47,040 --> 00:05:50,280
Speaker 1: I have disagreements about certain things. I mean, Jeffrey Workin

92
00:05:51,200 --> 00:05:54,360
Speaker 1: was the key d o J lawyer on a number

93
00:05:54,360 --> 00:05:57,600
Speaker 1: of cases I was involved in where the government did

94
00:05:57,640 --> 00:06:00,440
Speaker 1: not intervene, and I didn't agree with those hittance. I

95
00:06:00,480 --> 00:06:04,840
Speaker 1: never agree with those decisions, Um, But you know, I

96
00:06:04,880 --> 00:06:07,760
Speaker 1: did hear from other people that you know, he was

97
00:06:08,040 --> 00:06:12,320
Speaker 1: a very aggressive advocate for other cases. So it certainly

98
00:06:12,360 --> 00:06:15,360
Speaker 1: came as a complete surprise that this happened. And I

99
00:06:15,440 --> 00:06:18,000
Speaker 1: would say this is an aberration. But what I would

100
00:06:18,040 --> 00:06:22,120
Speaker 1: say about this case is that he left with at

101
00:06:22,200 --> 00:06:27,479
Speaker 1: least one, apparently one seal complaint, which clearly is not legal,

102
00:06:27,800 --> 00:06:30,440
Speaker 1: and the fact that he had at least one sealed

103
00:06:30,480 --> 00:06:33,880
Speaker 1: complaints suggests that maybe he had more than one. He

104
00:06:34,080 --> 00:06:38,119
Speaker 1: is assigned as the key point person on a number

105
00:06:38,120 --> 00:06:41,520
Speaker 1: of these false claims cases a year, and he also

106
00:06:41,640 --> 00:06:45,359
Speaker 1: potentially has access to other False Claims Act complaints that

107
00:06:45,360 --> 00:06:48,400
Speaker 1: are under sealed because because as Nolan mentioned, he has

108
00:06:48,440 --> 00:06:51,359
Speaker 1: to determine whether there's a first to file issue that

109
00:06:51,440 --> 00:06:54,680
Speaker 1: he has to tell lawyers about. So he had access

110
00:06:54,680 --> 00:06:57,719
Speaker 1: not only to his own complaints, but presumably to other ones,

111
00:06:58,200 --> 00:07:01,680
Speaker 1: and certainly in terms of decisions where the government did

112
00:07:01,680 --> 00:07:05,400
Speaker 1: not intervene in cases that he was involved in. If

113
00:07:05,400 --> 00:07:08,680
Speaker 1: there's any inkling that he was doing this while he

114
00:07:08,800 --> 00:07:11,240
Speaker 1: was at d o J, I think it's really important

115
00:07:11,680 --> 00:07:15,160
Speaker 1: that those cases be you know, we examined to determine

116
00:07:15,160 --> 00:07:18,800
Speaker 1: that those intervention decisions were made properly and that those

117
00:07:18,840 --> 00:07:22,520
Speaker 1: were leaders were treated properly. I want to thank our guest,

118
00:07:22,600 --> 00:07:25,800
Speaker 1: David Stone of Stone and Manganini and Nola J. Hitchcock

119
00:07:26,120 --> 00:07:29,000
Speaker 1: Hitchcock Cross of the Cross Law Firm, talking about the

120
00:07:29,000 --> 00:07:30,240
Speaker 1: case of Jeffrey workin