Gordon Coburn Archives - FCPA Professor

“That Cognizant Was Acting In Furtherance Of Generally Applicable Government Policies Does Not Render All Of Its Actions State Actions”

By Mike Koehler on July 28, 2023 in Cognizant Technology Solutions, Gordon Coburn, Internal Investigation Issues, Steven Schwartz, Uncategorized

As highlighted in this prior post, in connection with the Cognizant Technology Solutions Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action concerning obtaining various permits in India, in early 2019 the DOJ (and SEC) also charged Gordon Coburn (former President and CFO of the company) and Steven Schwartz (former Executive Vice President and Chief Legal and Corporate Affairs Officer) with various FCPA offenses.

As highlighted in this prior post, in late 2022 the individuals filed motions claiming that the government outsourced its investigation to Cognizant.

Former Cognizant Executives Seek Relief – Claiming That The Government Outsourced Its Investigation To Cognizant

By Mike Koehler on December 26, 2022 in Gordon Coburn, Internal Investigation Issues, Steven Schwartz

The case against the former executives remains active and recently Schwartz and Coburn filed motions seeking various forms of relief claiming that the government outsourced its investigation to Cognizant. Continue Reading

In An FCPA Issue Of First Impression, Judge Rules That Separate E-mails In Furtherance Of The Same Alleged Bribery Scheme Are Separate “Units Of Prosecution”

By Mike Koehler on February 20, 2020 in FCPA Jurisprudence, Gordon Coburn, Identity of Foreign Official, Steven Schwartz

As highlighted in this prior post, in connection with the Cognizant Technology Solutions Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action concerning obtaining various permits in India, the DOJ (and SEC) also charged Gordon Coburn (former President and CFO of the company) and Steven Schwartz (former Executive Vice President and Chief Legal and Corporate Affairs Officer) with various FCPA offenses.

Coburn and Schwartz are putting the government to its burden of proof and recently U.S. District Court Judge Kevin McNulty (D.N.J. – pictured) denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss. (See here). In doing so, the judge ruled on an FCPA issue of first impression – that being what is the appropriate “unit of prosecution” under the FCPA’s anti-bribery provisions. As discussed below, the judge concluded that separate e-mails – even if in connection with the same alleged bribery scheme – constitute separate violations of the FCPA’s anti-bribery provisions.

SEC’s Case Against Former Cognizant Executives Coburn And Schwartz Stayed Due To Parallel Criminal Case

By Mike Koehler on November 18, 2019 in Gordon Coburn, Steven Schwartz

As highlighted in this prior post, in early 2019 former Cognizant executives Gordon Coburn and Steven Schwartz were criminally and civilly charged by the DOJ / SEC in a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action focused on obtaining planning permits in India. The prior post noted that if the defendants choose to put the DOJ/SEC to its burden of proof, disputed issues will likely focus on corrupt intent, obtain or retain business and the facilitating payments exception.

Coburn and Schwartz are indeed putting the government to its burden of proof and recently a Magistrate Judge in the U.S. District Court – District of New Jersey granted the DOJ’s motion to intervene in the SEC matter and to stay discovery in the civil case while the criminal case proceeds. (See 2019 WL 6013139).

Briefing In Coburn / Schwartz Matter Reflects The Human Costs Of Being Charged With FCPA Offenses

By Mike Koehler on May 16, 2019 in FCPA Trial, FCPA Trials, Gordon Coburn, Steven Schwartz

As highlighted in this prior post, in connection with the February 2019 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action against Cognizant Technology Solutions, the DOJ and SEC also brought related FCPA charges against Gordon Coburn (former President of the company) and Steven Schwartz (former Executive Vice President, Chief Legal and Corporate Affairs Officer).

In this recent filing, the DOJ is seeking to intervene in the SEC case and seeks a stay in that matter, including as to discovery, “in order to preserve the integrity of the prosecution of the Criminal Case, advance the public interest, and prevent the defendants from circumventing the narrow confines of criminal discovery through broad civil requests and related litigation.”

As highlighted below, Coburn and Schwartz’s briefs opposing the stay highlight what life is like upon being criminally and civilly charged for FCPA violations.

1 2 Next →

Top Menu

Navigation

“That Cognizant Was Acting In Furtherance Of Generally Applicable Government Policies Does Not Render All Of Its Actions State Actions”

Former Cognizant Executives Seek Relief – Claiming That The Government Outsourced Its Investigation To Cognizant

In An FCPA Issue Of First Impression, Judge Rules That Separate E-mails In Furtherance Of The Same Alleged Bribery Scheme Are Separate “Units Of Prosecution”

SEC’s Case Against Former Cognizant Executives Coburn And Schwartz Stayed Due To Parallel Criminal Case

Briefing In Coburn / Schwartz Matter Reflects The Human Costs Of Being Charged With FCPA Offenses

Subscribe