FCPA Enforcement Update – DOJ Arrests Four Individuals for Bribery Activities in Vietnam
Client Alert | 1 min read | 09.10.08
Recent FCPA arrests demonstrate continued emphasis on prosecuting individuals. The Department of Justice announced last week the arrest and indictment of four individuals on charges that they and their company, Nexus Technologies, Inc., paid at least $150,000 in bribes to Vietnamese officials to obtain contracts to supply the Vietnamese government with technology and equipment, including underwater mapping equipment, bomb containment equipment, helicopter parts, chemical detectors, satellite communication parts, and air tracking systems. Nexus Technologies was also indicted and has not entered a plea or deferred prosecution agreement. The company, which is incorporated in Delaware and has offices in Philadelphia, New Jersey, and Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, is in the business of procuring equipment and consulting services for various sectors, including the petroleum, power generation, civil aviation, and maritime industries. The individual defendants were identified as Joseph Lukas, An Nguyen, Kim Nguyen, and Nam Nguyen, all of whom are U.S. citizens.
The charges consist of one count of conspiracy to bribe Vietnamese public officials in violation of the FCPA and four substantive counts of violating the FCPA. Each individual defendant, if convicted, could face five years in prison per count, and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines, while Nexus Technologies could be fined $2 million for each count. The Department of Commerce’s Office of Export Enforcement is also investigating the matter for possible export control violations.
These indictments, which apparently are the first related to bribery in Vietnam, are the most recent example of relatively modest payments leading to significant consequences for both a company and its employees.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.22.25
The Federal Circuit recently addressed a case of first impression involving AI patented technology under 35 U.S.C. § 101 to hold that “claims that do no more than apply established methods of machine learning to a new data environment” are not patent eligible. This case provides helpful guidance for patent prosecutors on how to draft claims directed to AI technology to be patent-eligible and for litigators on how to attack or defend AI patents.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.21.25
Agencies to Curtail Unique, Customized Acquisitions in Favor of Commercial Products and Services
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.21.25
ClassPass’ Petition for Rehearing Will Tell the Future of Sign-In Wrap Agreements on the Internet
Client Alert | 5 min read | 04.21.25
DOJ Secures First Criminal Wage-Fixing Conviction in Home Health Care Staffing Case