In September 2024, Glenn Oztemel (previously employed by Arcadia Fuels Ltd. and Freepoint Commodities LLC) was found guilty at trial of FCPA and related offenses in connection with a Brazil bribery scheme. (See here for the prior post).
As stated in the DOJ release: “According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Oztemel […] paid bribes to officials of Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. (Petrobras), the Brazilian state-owned oil and gas company, to obtain lucrative contracts for Arcadia Fuels Ltd. (Arcadia) and Freepoint Commodities LLC (Freepoint). […] With the assistance of others, Oztemel paid and caused the payment of bribes to Petrobras officials for their assistance in helping Arcadia and Freepoint to obtain and retain fuel oil contracts with Petrobras and by providing Oztemel and others with confidential information regarding Petrobras’ fuel oil business. Oztemel and his co-conspirators caused Arcadia and Freepoint to make corrupt payments — disguised as purported consulting fees and commissions — to a third party intermediary and agent, Eduardo Innecco, 74, knowing that Innecco would pay a portion of those funds to Brazilian officials, including to Houston-based Petrobras trader Rodrigo Berkowitz.”
Oztemel’s legal team recently filed a sentencing memorandum which states in summary fashion:
Glenn Oztemel is consistently described by family, friends, and colleagues as one of the kindest people they know. Their description of him is not just one of general impression; it comes from observing a lifetime of generous acts, only some of which are memorialized in the attached letters. They discuss how he personally supported and intervened to help two young men—one a work colleague, another a high school friend—who struggled with substance abuse; loaned his home to a stranger for two months because she was a friend of a friend who needed to be close to her terminally ill mother; showed up repeatedly for a colleague’s wife who was battling cancer; and mentored dozens of junior colleagues, guiding them in their professional and personal lives. Some credit him with helping save their careers—and even their marriages. His children’s friends regard him as a father figure. His brother Gary now relies on him for caretaking during his own battle with cancer. All describe the warmth he brings to every gathering, whether playing piano for his nieces and nephews during the holidays, or thoughtfully engaging with friends and competitors alike about the news of the day, listening attentively and respectfully to people whose politics and views differ dramatically from his.
Glenn’s life has changed dramatically in the wake of this case. The crimes for which he has been convicted are undoubtedly serious, but so too have been the consequences. Glenn will never again work in the oil industry. He lost more than his job; he lost a decades-long career that he loved and in which he found his professional calling. He has suffered significant financial loss with more to come. He has lived with the overwhelming sadness and weight of a lost reputation that took a lifetime to build. He has been on supervised release for almost three years, and any additional restriction of his liberty can be accomplished through home confinement, supervised release, and mandatory community service. None of the goals of sentencing require incarceration. General deterrence and respect for the law have already been achieved and can be further accomplished without imprisonment. Glenn has been prosecuted and is a convicted felon, and his fall has been public. Indeed, as discussed below, respect for the law would be enhanced by the avoidance of sentencing disparities: notably, in the past few years, four oil trading companies have entered into agreements admitting FCPA violations involving trading fuel oil with Petrobras and paid over a billion dollars in fines, but Glenn and his brother Gary are the only traders with Petrobras to be charged.
For these reasons […] undersigned counsel respectfully submit that a sentence of probation with a component of home detention and a requirement of significant community service is a fair and just sentence.”
Elsewhere, the sentencing memo states:
“While there is no question that the offense for which Glenn is being sentenced is serious, a Guidelines sentence of 235-to-293 months set out by the PSR—let alone the 360-to-life range calculation provided by the government—is a gross overstatement of the offense. It relies on a faulty calculation of Freepoint’s gain and applies enhancements unsupported by the evidence at trial. Even putting these issues aside, the Guidelines do not accurately reflect culpability and are fundamentally unhelpful to the Court’s analysis, for five reasons.
First, it would be grossly disproportionate to sentence Glenn to a period of incarceration when Freepoint’s competitors—ostensibly victims of a scheme to gain an unfair trade advantage— allocuted to the same or similar conduct. Yet not a single individual at any of those companies was charged, let alone sentenced, in relation to conduct in Brazil. Second, this disproportionality is even more stark when considering the DOJ’s significant rollback of FCPA enforcement, and considering sentences received by similarly situated defendants in prior FCPA cases. Third, due to the Guidelines’ inordinate emphasis on loss amount, the advisory range—however calculated— offers no real guidance regarding an appropriate sentence in this case. Fourth, due to the punishment associated with this prosecution, including Glenn’s de facto banishment from the industry, there is no need for specific or general deterrence. Fifth, Glenn’s personal circumstances and characteristics weigh heavily in favor of a sentence involving home confinement and supervised release conditions that enable him to continue to contribute to society, care for his brother, and support the many family members and friends who need him in their lives.
Certain of these points seem valid, while others do not.
For instance, under the heading, “Under New DOJ Guidance, Similar Cases Are No Longer Being Pursued,” the memo states:
“Since the beginning of this year—just four months after the conclusion of Glenn’s trial— the landscape of FCPA enforcement changed dramatically when President Trump issued an Executive Order “pausing” FCPA enforcement. The resulting DOJ guidance has shifted the focus away from cases like Glenn’s, including by dismissing existing FCPA cases and charging few new FCPA cases. As a result, a sentence of imprisonment—when individuals engaging in similar conduct are almost certain not to be charged in the future—would work a significant “unwarranted sentencing disparit[y]” of the type the Court must consider under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6).
In February, President Trump issued an Executive Order entitled “Pausing Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement to Further American Economic and National Security,” ordering the Attorney General and the FCPA Unit to “focus on investigations” involving cartels and TCOs, out of the President’s concern that the FCPA “has been systematically, and to a steadily increasing degree, stretched beyond proper bounds and abused in a manner that harms the interests of the United States.” In the Executive Order, the President directed the Attorney General to undertake a review “in detail” for a period of 180 days of “all existing FCPA investigations or enforcement actions” in order to determine the appropriate action moving forward.
In June 2025, as a result of this internal review, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a memorandum, “Guidelines for Investigations and Enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).” The memorandum provides factors that the Department shall consider when determining whether to pursue FCPA investigations and enforcement actions, including whether (1) the misconduct is linked to the criminal operations, money launderers or shell companies, or employees bribed by cartels or TCOs; (2) the misconduct has undermined the economic growth and expansion of U.S. business opportunities abroad; (3) the misconduct has harmed American national security interests, such as “defense, intelligence, or critical infrastructure”; and (4) “serious” misconduct involving more than “routine business practices” but rather that which “bears strong indicia of corrupt intent.”
Since February, in line with the Executive Order and the Blanche Memorandum, the Department has shifted away from cases like Glenn’s. Notably, the Department has charged very few new FCPA cases this year, and has only tried a single case nationwide, United States v. Zaglin,
No. 23 Cr. 20454 (S.D. Fla.). Significantly, the Department recently sought dismissal of cases more closely resembling the charges against Glenn. See, e.g., United States v. Coburn, No. 19 Cr. 120 (D.N.J.). In Coburn, the government alleged that two executives at Cognizant, an information technology company, authorized a payment to government officials in India through an Indian construction company to build an office campus in Tamil Nadu. After its review of the case, the government moved to dismiss after “the recent assessment of the Executive Order’s application to this matter.” While the government did not expand on its reasons for recommending dismissal, its actions are consistent with the Executive Order and Blanche Memorandum: Neither of the Cognizant executives’ conduct, like Glenn’s, had anything to do with cartels or TCOs; the subject matter of the construction contract, like Glenn’s fuel oil transactions, had nothing to do with U.S. national security interests; and Cognizant was not competing against other American companies for a permit to build its office campus in India, while Glenn was most often competing against foreign companies with, as discussed, histories of bribery themselves. Comparing these two cases—one dismissed, one taken to trial, by happenstance of timing—underscore the severe injustice that would occur were Glenn to be sentenced to incarceration based on charges that might never have been brought, let alone tried, at the time of sentencing.”
The suggestion that the “the Department has charged very few new FCPA cases this year, and has only tried a single case nationwide” ignores the fact that thus far in 2025 there have been more corporate FCPA enforcements compared to 2021 and 2015.
In addition, the present is likely one of the more active periods of FCPA trials in history. In September, an individual was found guilty of FCPA and related offenses at trial (see here for the prior post), another FCPA trial began earlier this week (see here), and two additional individual FCPA trials are scheduled to begin 2026.
Moreover, the reference to the individual FCPA enforcement action against former Cognizant executives ignores that this case was lingering for many years and had several obvious factual and legal flaws. (See here for the prior post).
