United States of America ex rel. Uri Bassan v. Omnicare, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided February 17, 2023·No. 1:15-cv-04179·Unknown

Opinion

Unite South SO ORDERED \ Febr VALERIE FIGUEREDO By ECF United States Magistrate Judge Hon. Valerie Figueredo Dated: 2-17- United States Magistrate Judge Omnicare is directed to respond to the Government’s letter m Southern District of New York (ECF No. 189) by Tuesday, February 21, 2023. Any reply by Government is due by no later than Friday, February 24, 202: 500 Pearl Street 5:00 p.m. The Court will address this issue at the conference New York, NY 10007 scheduled for Tuesday, February 28, 2023 at 2:30 p.m. Re: — United States ex rel. Bassan et al. v. Omnicare, Inc. & CVS Health Corp., 15 Civ. 4179 (CM) (VF) Dear Judge Figueredo: We write respectfully on behalf of the United States to seek an order precluding Omnicare from supplying as evidence—on a motion, at a hearing, or at trial—any prescription documentation for sample dispensations that has not already been produced in discovery. Upon the Government’s request, Omnicare agreed to produce by January 6, 2023 and January 17, 2023, all prescription documentation for a sample of more than 100,000 drug dispensations. Although Omnicare produced some prescription documentation by those deadlines, Omnicare recently indicated that it did not produce all such documentation within its possession, custody, or control. On February 10, 2023—-without notice, and after court-ordered deadlines had passed—Omnicare produced additional prescription documentation for sample dispensations, without seeking permission from the Court. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(c)(1), a party that fails to timely produce information during discovery “is not allowed to use that information . . . to supply evidence on a motion, at a hearing, or at a trial, unless the failure was substantially justified or is harmless.” See also Design Strategy, Inc. v. Davis, 469 F.3d 284, 296 (2d Cir. 2006). “The purpose of the rule is to prevent the practice of ‘sandbagging’ an opposing party with new evidence.” Ebewo v. Martinez, 309 F.Supp.2d 600, 607 (S.D.N.Y. 2004). Here, Omnicare was obligated to produce all prescription documentation for the sample dispensations by court-ordered deadlines intended to provide the Government’s expert sufficient time to examine and offer opinions as to the validity of the prescription documentation. Omnicare failed to comply with those deadlines. Omnicare did not seek an extension, nor has it provided any justification for its decision not to produce all such documentation within its possession, custody, or control. The Government will be prejudiced by the delayed production of prescription documentation, all of which must be examined by its pharmacy expert in order to render an accurate and reliable opinion. The Government requests that Omnicare be precluded from using or otherwise relying on any responsive prescription documentation not already produced in this case. Omnicare’s Obligation To Produce all Prescription Documentation Within its Possession, Custody, or Control. On May 10, 2021, the Government served Interrogatory 10, requesting that Omnicare identify the locations of all Drug Authorizations, i.e., prescription documentation, for drugs dispensed by Omnicare. (Ex. A at 11.) The Government also served RFPs 3 and 4, requesting that Omnicare produce all “Drug Authorizations” for all relevant “Rollover” dispensations. (/d. at

13.) The Government instructed Omnicare to “produce all responsive documents and tangible things which are in Defendant’s possession, custody, or control.” (Id. at 6.) In response to Interrogatory 10, Omnicare identified at least four locations where Omnicare maintained prescription documentation. (Ex. B at 22-23.) With respect to RFPs 3 and 4, Omnicare responded that it would “meet-and-confer with the Government” to discuss “the production of tranches of documents reflecting Drug Authorizations . . . located after a reasonable search.”1 (Id. at 31-32.)

After meeting and conferring, Omnicare agreed to produce all prescription documentation for sample dispensations to be identified by the Government. On April 8, 2022, Omnicare confirmed that “the documents Omnicare intends to produce in response to [RFPs 3 and 4] would be from the systems or locations identified in response to Interrogatories 10-12.” (Ex. C. at 2.) At the September 7, 2022, conference before Judge McMahon, Omnicare noted that its search for responsive prescription documentation would involve “a multistep process that needs to be written” to capture “the various ways these kinds of documents may be in computer systems,” as well as searching for “hard copy records” that “are not necessarily computerized.” (Dkt. 127-4 at 38:22 - 39:9.)

Consistent with this, the Court ordered that “[s]upporting documentation reflecting prescriber authorizations for the identified sample dispensations from the OMNI DX system shall be produced” by December 2, 2022, and that “prescriber authorizations” for the Oasis sample be produced by January 6, 2023. (Dkt. 121 at 2.) The deadline for “Defendants to produce prescription documentation for [the] OmniDX sample” was later extended to January 17, 2023. (Dkt. 167.) Omnicare sought no further extensions. Thus, the Government understood that Omnicare would produce all prescription documentation for the sample dispensations that were within Omnicare’s possession, custody, or control by the January 6 and January 17, 2023 deadlines.

Omnicare’s Unilateral Decision To Limit its January 2023 Productions to Prescription Documentation in Two Locations. In an email dated January 13, 2023, Omnicare represented that it was “producing all documents in its document imaging system that are associated with the patients identified by the government as part of its samples. In addition, Omnicare is producing data reflecting electronic prescriptions related to those same patients.” (Ex. D at 1.) On January 6, 13, and 17, 2023, Omnicare made productions of prescription documentation responsive to the Government’s requests.

On January 18, 2023, the Government asked Omnicare to confirm by January 20, 2023, that, “in response to RFPs 3 and 4, Omnicare is producing all Drug Authorizations relevant to the sample dispensations that are in Omnicare’s possession, custody, or control.” (Ex. E at 5.) More than a week later, on January 27, Omnicare responded that “the documents Omnicare has produced in response to those RFPs are from Omnicare’s document-imaging system and its e-prescription data,” but said nothing about withholding responsive documents within its possession, custody, or control. (Id. at 4.) After further prodding, on February 10, 2023, Omnicare stated that it “cannot rule out . . . that some additional non-duplicative responsive documents exist, most likely in hard copy.” (Id. at 2-3.) That same date, Omnicare produced 13 pages of additional prescription documentation for sample Oasis dispensations. (Id.)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States of America ex rel. Uri Bassan v. Omnicare, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

United States of America ex rel. Uri Bassan v. Omnicare, Inc. (United States of America ex rel. Uri Bassan v. Omnicare, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Design Strategy, Inc. v. Davis
469 F.3d 284 (Second Circuit, 2006)
Ebewo v. Martinez
309 F. Supp. 2d 600 (S.D. New York, 2004)