DOJ's FCPA Pilot Program Issues First Public Declination Under Trump Administration
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.21.17
Last Friday, the Department of Justice publicly disclosed another declination under its FCPA pilot program. This is the sixth public declination by the Department since first launching the program in April 2016 (as previously discussed in a Crowell & Moring alert). It also represents the first public declination since the Department announced the temporary extension of the pilot program on March 10, 2017, and the first under the new administration.
The Facts
In its June 16th letter to counsel for Linde North America Inc. and Linde Gas North America LLC, the Department outlined a series of factual findings related to Linde’s FCPA violations. It attributes the offending conduct to Spectra Gases, Inc., a New Jersey company acquired by Linde in October 2006, and states that between approximately November 2006 through December 2009, Linde—through Spectra—"made corrupt payments to high-level officials at the National High Technology Center (NHTC) of the Republic of Georgia, a 100 percent state-owned and -controlled entity, in connection with its purchase of certain income-producing assets from the NHTC." The alleged scheme involved three high-level Spectra executives agreeing to a profit-sharing arrangement with high-level NHTC officials. Namely, in exchange for the officials’ assistance in ensuring that Spectra was selected as the purchaser of key NHTC assets, the Spectra executives agreed to share profits resulting from future sales with those officials. Ultimately, the NHTC officials "received approximately 75 percent of the profits generated by" Spectra’s arrangement with NHTC. Prior to discovering the misconduct, Linde dissolved Spectra, became its successor-in-interest, and continued to benefit "as a result of the corrupt conduct."
Cooperation, Cooperation, Cooperation:
Consistent with prior declinations, the Department credited a number of examples of Linde’s cooperation that factored into the declination, including: "Linde’s voluntary self-disclosure of the matter;" "the thorough, comprehensive and proactive investigation undertaken by Linde;" "Linde’s full cooperation in the matter (including its provision of all known relevant facts about the individuals involved in or responsible for the misconduct) and its agreement to continue to cooperate in any ongoing investigations of individuals;" "the steps Linde has taken and continues to take to enhance its compliance program and its internal accounting controls" and "Linde’s full remediation" described as "including terminating and/or taking disciplinary action against the employees involved in the misconduct, including the Spectra Executives and lower-level employees involved in the misconduct)," withholding certain payments from the executives, and terminating a management agreement with and withholding payments from "companies owned or controlled by the NHTC Officials."
About the Money
Although Linde successfully avoided criminal prosecution, it also agreed to disgorge $7.8 million (representing profits and benefits received by Spectra and, subsequently, Linde) and to forfeit an additional $3.4 million (representing "corrupt proceeds owed to companies owned or controlled by the NHTC Officials"). Linde’s agreement to continue cooperating means that the financial costs may yet increase, and the Department is at least telegraphing that it intends to continue investigating the individuals involved.
Cautionary Tale
Linde got to the right result in this matter, but the cost of getting there was not cheap. Like other matters, this FCPA declination is a stark reminder of the importance of pre-acquisition due diligence.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
