United States v. Purdue Frederick Co., Inc.

Purdue Frederick Co., Inc. (Purdue) (defendant) pleaded guilty to misbranding the prescription opioid pain medication OxyContin with intent to defraud or deceive in violation of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Three individual defendants pleaded guilty to misdemeanors as responsible corporate officers of Purdue. The plea did not imply any of the individuals had personal knowledge of the misbranding or any intent to defraud. Purdue stipulated certain employees made misrepresentations about OxyContin with the intent to defraud or deceive, and the officers agreed that the court could accept those facts to support their guilty pleas. If the court rejected the plea agreement, the government (plaintiff) intended to dismiss the charges without prejudice so it could later charge the same or other parties. In the plea agreement, Purdue agreed to pay significant monetary sanctions totaling $600 million, of which $160 million was assigned to pay settlements with government healthcare providers, and $130 million was set aside to settle claims with private healthcare providers. The three officers, who were subject by law to up to 12 months’ imprisonment, agreed to pay several million dollars to the Virginia Medical Fraud Unit’s Program Income Fund in exchange for no incarceration. Several private healthcare providers opposed the plea agreement and filed Requests for Notice, Opportunity to be Heard at Sentencing, and Orders for Restitution. An individual who became addicted to OxyContin also objected to the plea agreement and filed a Motion to Assert Victim’s Rights and raised concerns including the lack of ordered restitution. Both parties were given notice and the opportunity to speak at sentencing.