Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

The United States filed a denaturalization action in the Western District of Virginia yesterday against Slobodan Letic, a native of Croatia, who, according to the Department of Justice’s complaint, concealed and misrepresented his involvement in the beating, torture, and sexual assault of civilians in the Bosnian War in 1992, when he was an officer in the Bosnian Serb army. Letic took two women detainees out of a camp before driving them to an apartment where he beat and raped them. After the women were released from the camp, Letic later found one of them walking in the streets and again took her to an abandoned house and forcefully raped her. Letic also invaded the homes of other civilians in Bosnia and inflicted severe beatings, torture, and mock executions on them.

Letic concealed his involvement in war crimes and acts of persecution throughout his immigration and naturalization proceedings after entering the United States by claiming to be a refugee in 2000. Additionally, the civil complaint alleges that Letic concealed his Bosnian criminal convictions for corruption-related acts he performed as a police officer after the war. Letic naturalized as a U.S. citizen on Sept. 22, 2006.

“The United States is not a safe haven for war criminals and human rights violators,” said Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “Letic entered our country posing as a victim of persecution when in fact he had committed horrendous acts as a persecutor of others. He took advantage of our generous system for refugee admissions and should not have been granted U.S. citizenship. This action seeks to redress that wrong, and we are committed to upholding the integrity of the naturalization process against fraud and misrepresentation.”

Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, a naturalized U.S. citizen’s citizenship may be revoked, and his certificate of naturalization canceled, if the naturalization was illegally procured or procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation.

This case was investigated by the Civil Division’s Office of Immigration Litigation, with assistance from the FBI, Homeland Security Investigations Historian William Tomljanovich and Attaché John Christoforo of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the government of Bosnia. The litigation is being handled by Trial Attorney Christopher Lyerla and reviewed by Max Weintraub of the Office of Immigration Litigation, General Litigation and Appeals Section, Affirmative Litigation Unit.

The claims made in the complaint are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

Yesterday the U.S. Department of Justice transmitted a legislative proposal to Congress that protects and defends children from chemical and surgical mutilation under the guise of “gender-affirming care,” in line with Executive Order 14187.

The Victims of Chemical or Surgical Mutilation Act (VCSMA), led by Representative Bob Onder (R, MO-03) and Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), prohibits healthcare professionals, physicians, hospitals, or clinics from participating in the chemical or surgical mutilation of a child and creates a private right of action for children and the parents of children whose healthy body parts have been damaged by medical professionals practicing chemical and surgical mutilation.

“The Department of Justice has heard from far too many families who have been devastated by mutilative medical procedures that fly in the face of basic biology,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “While we continue our ongoing legal battle to protect children, we appreciate our colleagues in Congress who are working diligently alongside us to end these abusive procedures once and for all.”

Read The Victims of Chemical or Surgical Mutilation Act HERE.

Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

Today, the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division won significant remedies in its monopolization case against Google in online search. In United States et al. v. Google, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia prohibited Google from entering or maintaining exclusive contracts relating to the distribution of Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant, and the Gemini app; ordered Google to make certain search index and user-interaction data available to rivals and potential rivals; and ordered Google to offer search and search text ads syndication services to enable rivals and potential rivals to compete.

The court’s ruling today recognizes the need for remedies that will pry open the market for general search services, which has been frozen in place for over a decade. The ruling also recognizes the need to prevent Google from using the same anticompetitive tactics for its GenAI products as it used to monopolize the search market, and the remedies will reach GenAI technologies and companies.

“This decision marks an important step forward in the Department of Justice’s ongoing fight to protect American consumers. Under President Trump’s leadership, we will continue our legal efforts to hold companies accountable for monopolistic practices,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi.  

“The first Trump administration sued Google to restore competition for millions of Americans subjected to Google’s monopoly abuses. Today, the second Trump administration has won a remedy to do just that,” said Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. “We will continue to review the opinion to consider the Department’s options and next steps regarding seeking additional relief. I am immensely proud of the dedicated public servants of the Antitrust Division and their tireless work on this case alongside our state partners.”

Filed in President Trump’s first term, the Justice Department’s case against the Google search monopoly has unified the country. The Department’s original filing in October 2020 was joined by eleven State Attorneys General. Additional states filed a related action as the case progressed, and ultimately, the United States was joined in pursuing the remedies ordered today by 49 states, two territories, and the District of Columbia.

Under the remedies ordered today, Google will be barred from entering or maintaining exclusive contracts relating to the distribution of Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant, and the Gemini app. Google cannot enter or maintain agreements that (1) condition the licensing of any Google application on the distribution, preloading, or placement of Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant, or the Gemini app anywhere on a device; (2) condition the receipt of revenue share payments for the placement of one Google application on the placement of another Google application; or (3) condition the receipt of revenue share payments on maintaining Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant, or the Gemini app on any device, browser, or search access point for more than one year; or (4) prohibit any partner from simultaneously distributing any other GSE, browser, or GenAI product.

In addition, Google will have to make certain search index and user-interaction data available to certain competitors. Google will also be required to offer certain competitors search and search text ads syndication services, which will open up the market by enabling rivals and potential rivals to deliver high-quality search results and ads and compete with Google as they develop their own capacity.

For years, Google accounted for approximately 90 percent of all search queries in the United States, and Google used anticompetitive tactics to maintain and extend its monopolies in search and search advertising. Google entered into a series of exclusionary agreements that collectively locked up the primary avenues through which users access online search, requiring that Google be the preset default general search engine on billions of mobile devices and computers and, in many cases, prohibiting preinstallation of a competitor. Using its monopoly profits, Google bought preferential treatment for its search engine and created a self-reinforcing cycle of monopolization — shutting out potential competitors, reducing innovation, and taking choice away from American consumers.

The Department of Justice and the states proved that Google broke the law over the course of a bench trial that started in September 2023 and lasted nine weeks. In August 2024, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia released a 277-page opinion, concluding that “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly” in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Today’s decision follows a 15-day remedies trial in May 2025.

Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

The United States has intervened and filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania under the False Claims Act (FCA) against ProMedica Health System, Inc. (ProMedica) and various affiliated entities including HCR ManorCare Inc. and four nursing homes located in Pennsylvania, Ohio, South Carolina, and Virginia (the defendants). ProMedica is a nonprofit corporation that is headquartered in Toledo, Ohio. From 2018 to 2023, it owned and controlled the following four nursing homes: ProMedica Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation – Pottstown (Pennsylvania), ProMedica Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation – Riverview (Ohio), ProMedica Skilled Nursing, Rehabilitation – Greenville East (South Carolina), and ProMedica Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation – Imperial (Virginia).

In its complaint in intervention, the United States alleged that the four nursing homes provided non-existent, grossly substandard skilled nursing facility care or services that otherwise failed to meet the required standards of care under the Nursing Home Reform Act. The United States alleged that, from 2017 to 2023, the defendants failed to develop or follow individualized care plans for their residents. Specifically, in many cases, the facilities failed to provide adequate wound care to prevent pressure ulcers, failed to maintain residents’ hygiene and to provide showers as required, and failed to provide residents with appropriate assistance with feeding, which led to severe weight loss in many cases. To conceal their provision of grossly substandard care, in some cases, defendants falsely documented in resident medical records that care and services had been provided to residents when it had not been.

“The Justice Department is committed to protecting the most vulnerable members of our society, including elderly and infirm individuals who depend on nursing homes for safe and dignified skilled nursing care,” said Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “Grossly substandard care places nursing home residents at serious risk of harm and this suit sends a clear message that we will pursue health care providers who fail to meet their legal obligations to provide required care and who betray the trust of the residents they are meant to serve.”

“An increasing number of older adults and persons with disabilities are residing in long-term care facilities. These residents are often particularly vulnerable to inadequate assessment and treatment of their needs,” said U.S. Attorney David Metcalf for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. “Beginning almost 30 years ago, the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania filed some of the first False Claims Act complaints and reached some of the first settlements in the United States to focus on quality of care in the nursing home environment. Today’s complaint again serves notice to the nursing home industry that a failure to provide adequate nursing home care will not be tolerated. Public funds expended for nursing home residents must result in appropriate care, which is what the government pays for, and the law requires.”

The complaint in intervention is the result of a coordinated effort by the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, with assistance from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General. This matter is being handled by Fraud Section attorneys Susan C. Lynch, Robbin O. Lee, and Samuel P. Robins, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys David Degnan and Gerald B. Sullivan for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

The case is captioned United States, et al., ex. rel. Compton v. HCR ManorCare, Inc., et al., No. 16-cv-0851 (E.D. Pa.). 

The claims asserted in the complaint are allegations only. There has been no determination of liability.