Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.

Skip to Content

Verizon False Claims Act Settlement Signals DOJ’s Sustained Focus on Cybersecurity-Related Violations

On September 5, the Department of Justice (DOJ) settled allegations under the False Claims Act against Verizon Business Network Services LLC, a telecommunications provider. The settlement emphasizes the DOJ’s continued efforts to enforce cybersecurity compliance against federal contractors.

Between 2017 and 2021, Verizon submitted proposals for, and was awarded, federal contracts by the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA). The contracts required Verizon to provide information technology services, including Managed Trusted Internet Protocol Services (MTIPS), to federal agencies. Verizon’s MTIPS provide federal agencies with secure connections to the public internet and other networks. Due to the nature of the services, the federal contracts required compliance with Trusted Internet Connections standards.

Following a self-initiated compliance review, Verizon discovered potential issues with its implementation and maintenance of certain security controls for its MTIPS solution. Verizon promptly reported the issues to the GSA Office of Inspector General. On its own accord, Verizon also initiated an independent investigation, cooperated with the government’s subsequent investigation, and separated a manager who had supervisory authority over the area where the issues occurred, among other things.

Under the settlement agreement, Verizon did not admit liability and agreed to pay $4.1 million to resolve alleged violations of the False Claims Act for reporting that it satisfied three required cybersecurity controls related to its GSA contracts.

This settlement illustrates what the DOJ described as a “cooperating federal contractor,” and how such cooperation might lead to better results in certain instances for the company as compared to fighting a government investigation. For example, in exchange for Verizon’s cooperation, it paid a 1.5 multiplier — less than its potential exposure under the False Claims Act, which can be three times the loss to the government plus penalties.

The Verizon settlement further underscores the DOJ’s commitment to investigate potential violations of the False Claims Act involving “knowing cybersecurity related violations under the Department’s Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative and to provide credit in settlements to government contractors that disclose misconduct, cooperate with pending investigations and take remedial measures.” This is the latest in a series of recent cybersecurity-based False Claims Act matters, including the recent settlement in Aerojet Rocketdyne.

Key Takeaways

Companies that do business with the government can minimize their exposure to cybersecurity-related False Claims Act liability by taking a few key steps:

  1. Carefully reviewing their assurances to the government when entering into and renewing federal government contracts.
  2. Proactively investigating and ensuring compliance with the cybersecurity requirements that apply to their federal government contracts.
  3. Equipping their personnel with adequate cybersecurity training that would allow them to identify potential issues and report and remediate the issues upon discovery.
  4. In consultation with counsel, evaluate whether to make a self-disclosure and the potential consequences of that action.
  5. If making a self-disclosure, work with counsel to reveal the extent of any noncompliance to the government.
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.