42 18 U.S.C. §§ 215 (bribery involving a financial institution); 656 (theft, etc., by bank officer); 657 (theft, etc., by officers of lending, credit, and insurance institutions); 1005 (fraud against the United States or a financial institution by an individual); 1006 (fraud against the United States or a financial institution by an individual insider); 1007 (FDIC); 1014 (FHA); 1344 (bank fraud); 15 U.S.C § 645(a) (fraud against the Small Business Administration). 43 18 U.S.C. §§ 287 (false claims to the government); 1001 (false statements to the government); 1032 (concealment of assets from the FDIC); 1341 (mail fraud); 1343 (wire fraud). Case 1:12-cv-07527-JMF Document 27 Filed 01/16/13 Page 51 of 62 40 Court construe (c)(2) in such a manner.

In the case of mail or wire fraud “affecting a federally insured financial institution,” id. § 1833a(c)(2), the “violator” is the perpetrator of the fraud, while the institution – “a person other than the violator” 18 See 18 U.S.C. § 287 (punishing false claims to government officials); id. § 1001 (punishing false statements to government officials), id.

Contrary to Plaintiff’s bald assertion that Smith’s statements made in the Kunego Email were intentionally false, the statements were, in fact, true, as shown through Chatterjee’s, Ahmed’s, Kanwal’s, and Carroll’s deposition testimony in the CNSI v. Louisiana litigation, ibid., all of which took place prior to CNSI initiating its Complaint in this action.8 CNSI’s misrepresentation of facts in their bid in response to the LMMIS solicitation constitutes a criminal offense. See 18 U.S.C. § 287 (1986) (“Whoever makes or presents to any person or officer in the civil, military, or naval service of the United States, or to any department or agency thereof, any claim upon or against the United States, or any department or agency thereof, knowing such claim to be false, fictitious, or fraudulent, shall be imprisoned not more than five years and shall be subject to a fine . . . .”). And, Smith testified at his deposition that he suspected CNSI was engaging in Medicaid fraud when he sent the Kunego Email.

DATE OF SIGNATURE / 512-330-0017 12/5/2016 CIVIL PENA~ R PRESENTING CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING FRAUDULENT FRAUD NT CLAIM CLAIM OR MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS The claimant is Hable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not less than Fine, imprisonment, or both. (See 18 U.S.C. 287, 1001.} $5,000 and not more than $10,000, plus 3 times the amount of damages sustained by the Government (See 31 U.S.C. 3729).

I b V' CIVIL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR PRESENTING FRAUDULENT FRAUDULENT CLAIM CLAIM OR MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS The daimant is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not less than Fine, imprisonment, or both. (See 18 U.S. C. 287, 1001.) $5,000 and not more than $10,000, plus 3 times the amount of damages sustained by the Government.

, \ The claimant is liable to the United States Government for a civit.pana1T£pfnot',less t~~n ' ---· -Ftfte, im[1rispnment, or both. (See 18 U.S.C. 287, 1001.) $5,000 and not more than $10,000, plus 3 times tho am~da~a-.

SIGNATTJRE (2t5) s46- 4L1.4 l3b. Phone of sign4toryOF r€verseon side CIIUM OR MAKNG FAI.SE STATEMEI{TS Fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment fc not mre than 5 years a both- (Sae 18u.s.c.287, 10U.) CRIMINAL PRF,SThITING ERAT]DTJLENT The claimant shall forfeit and pay o tbc United States tbe sum of $2,000 dorble the arrcunt of damSes sustained by the United Staes.

i. Conspiracy to defraud the Government with respect to claims, 18 U.S.C. § 286. j. False, fictitious or fraudulent claims, 18 U.S.C. § 287. k. Hate crime acts, 18 U.S.C. § 249.

See generally AR 243. As a result of the qui tam action, a criminal investigation followed and led to Samir’s indictment on July 23, 2007, on two counts of Conspiracy to Defraud the Government, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 286, and 44 counts of False Claims, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 287. See AR 81 – 93.

The same holds true for 18 U.S.C. §§ 1007, 1014 and 15 U.S.C. §645(a), which make it a crime for any person or entity to submit false statements to, inter alia, the FDIC, the Federal Housing Administration and the Small Business Administration. 12 See, e.g., Cresswell v. Sullivan & Cromwell, 922 F.2d 60 (2d Cir. 1990) (federal question jurisdiction could not be premised on 28 U.S.C. § 1927, which permits litigants to seek costs from anyone “who so multiplies the proceedings in any case unreasonably and vexatiously,” but does not authorize independent lawsuit); Inventorprise Inc. v. Target Corp., No. 09-CV-00380, 2009 WL 3644076 (N.D.N.Y. Nov. 2, 2009) (involving claim of false patent marking in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 292); United States v. Vanoosterhout, 898 F. Supp. 25 (D.D.C. 1995) (dismissing FIRREA claim against president of financial institution premised on submitting false claims to the Government in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 287 and 1001 solely because the financial institution was not federally insured), aff’d, 96 F.3d 1491 (D.C. Cir. 1996). Case 1:11-cv-06969-LAK Document 47 Filed 10/12/12 Page 37 of 74 24 the contrary, in some of these cases, the financial institutions pleaded guilty or entered into non- prosecution agreements in which they admitted to criminal liability.