DOJ Begins Targeting COVID-19 Fraud Schemes
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.20.20
In response to increased reporting of COVID-19-related fraud and misconduct, on March 16, 2020 Attorney General Barr directed all U.S. Attorneys to prioritize the prosecution of wrongdoers seeking to profit from this national crisis. Barr stated in his directive that "[t]he pandemic is dangerous enough without wrongdoers seeking to profit from public panic and this sort of conduct cannot be tolerated." Examples of such conduct include the sale of fake cures for COVID-19, phishing emails posing as the World Health Organization or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and malware being inserted into mobile apps designed to track the spread of the virus.
U.S. Attorneys have already started responding to the directive. The U.S. Attorneys in the Western District of Pennsylvania and the Southern District of Mississippi have each appointed a dedicated COVID-19 fraud coordinator, while other U.S. Attorneys have launched hotlines and educational campaigns to combat COVID-19-related fraud. They are joined by other U.S. agencies that are starting to ring similar alarm bells, like the GSA which put out a notice this week that it has received reports of companies fraudulently claiming to be GSA vendors to mislead consumers into paying exorbitant prices for products associated with COVID-19. Over the coming days and weeks, we expect that U.S. Attorneys and agencies across the country will further shift their criminal and civil enforcement priorities to cases stemming from the COVID-19 crisis.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
On April 30, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a significant ruling in an insurance coverage dispute between a commercial general liability insurer and its policyholder. The decision addresses several critical issues in insurance law, including the scope and continuity of the duty to defend and the standard for insurer reimbursement of defense costs in mixed-claim actions. The court ruled largely in favor of the insured, SVO Building One, LLC ("SVO"), and the matter now heads toward settlement or trial on SVO's remaining counterclaims.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
Client Alert | 5 min read | 05.29.26
Clover Insurance v. HHS: S.D. of Georgia Holds 20 Star Ratings Measures Unlawful
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.29.26

