Case Detail

SEC v. Johnson & Johnson (D.D.C. 2011)  


Case Details

  • Case Name
  • SEC v. Johnson & Johnson (D.D.C. 2011)  
  • Date Filed
  • 04/13/2011
  • Enforcement Agency
  • SEC
  • Countries
  • Greece, Iraq, Poland, Romania
  • Foreign Official
  • Publicly-employed doctors in Greece; publicly-employed doctors and hospital administrators in Poland; publicly-employed doctors and pharmacists in Romania; top Ministry of Health officials in Iraq.
  • Date of Conduct
  • 1999 to 2006
  • Nature of Business
  • Sale of medical devices and pharmaceuticals manufactured by DePuy, Inc. (“DePuy”) and DePuy International, both wholly-owned subsidiaries of Johnson & Johnson, a U.S.-based manufacturer and seller of health care products.  Other subsidiaries, employees, and agents of Johnson & Johnson allegedly paid bribes to publicly-employed health care providers in Poland and Romania and paid kickbacks to the former government of Iraq in connection with the U.N. Oil for Food Program.
  • Influence to be Obtained
  • From at least 1998 to 2006, DePuy International, through a Greek distributor which it later acquired, allegedly paid bribes to public doctors in Greece who selected DePuy’s surgical implants.  The scheme featured a complicated web of transactions involving distributors and agents paid through commissions overseas and allegedly resulted in $24,258,072 in profit.  
     
    In Poland, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, MD&D Poland, allegedly made improper payments to publicly employed doctors and hospital administrators in Poland to use their medical devices and award them medical device tenders from 2000 to 2006.  This scheme was carried out through sham civil contracts and false travel invoices and resulted in approximately $4,348,000 in profit for the company.  The SEC further alleged that, from 2000 to 2007, employees of Johnson & Johnson’s Romanian subsidiary, Pharma Romania, made improper payments to publicly employed doctors and pharmacists in Romania to prescribe Johnson & Johnson products through cash and travel payments.  Pharma Romania used local distributors to generate the cash that was ultimately paid to the doctors in exchange for the doctors prescribing Johnson & Johnson products.  The purported profit to Johnson & Johnson from these sales was $3,515,500.  
     
    Finally, two other Johnson & Johnson subsidiaries in Europe – Cilag AG International and Janssen Pharmaceutica N.V. – were accused of paying a Lebanese agent an inflated commission that included a 10% kickback to the former government of Iraq for participation in the U.N. Oil for Food Program.  The stated reason for the high commission to the Lebanese agent was “promotional activities,” yet that agent was unable to provide detailed evidence or description of any of those activities.  There are allegations of $857,387 in kickbacks in connection with nineteen U.N. Oil for Food contracts.  The total profit on those contracts is alleged to be $6,106,255.
     
  • Enforcement
  • Apart from the Oil‑for‑Food allegations, Johnson & Johnson had self‑disclosed some wrongdoing and had conducted wide‑reaching internal investigations.  On April 8, 2011, without admitting or denying the facts alleged in the SEC’s complaint, Johnson & Johnson consented to the entry of a court order permanently enjoining it from future violations of the anti‑bribery, books and records, and internal control provisions of the FCPA; ordering it to pay $38,227,826 in disgorgement and $10,438,490 in prejudgment interest; and ordering it to comply with an FCPA compliance program.
  • Amount of the Value
  • Unspecified.
  • Amount of Business Related to Payment
  • $38,227,826.
  • Intermediary
  • Greek distributor; Lebanese agent.
  • Citizenship of Parent Entity
  • United States
  • Total Sanction
  • $ 48,666,316
  • Compliance Monitor
  • No
  • Reporting Requirements
  • No
  • Case is Pending?
  • No
  • Total Combined Monetary Sanction
  • $ 70,066,316

Defendants

Johnson & Johnson 

  • Citation
  • SEC v. Johnson & Johnson, 1:11-cv-00686 (D.D.C. Apr. 13, 2011).
  • Date Filed
  • 04/13/2011
  • Filed Under Seal
  • No
  • FCPA Statutory Provision
    • Anti-Bribery
    • Conspiracy: Anti-Bribery
    • Conspiracy: Internal Controls
  • Other Statutory Provision
  • None
  • Disposition
  • Complaint and Consent Order
  • Defendant Jurisdictional Basis
  • Issuer
  • Defendant's Citizenship
  • United States
You may share a link to this page on any of the sites listed below:
Material on www.aoshearman.com is general information and should not be construed as legal advice. Contacting us by email does not create a lawyer-client relationship unless and until we have agreed to handle a particular matter. Please do not convey to us any information you regard as confidential unless and until a formal lawyer-client relationship has been established, as any information we receive from you prior to such time will not be confidential.
Accept Cancel