SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
This Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into among the United States of
America, acting through the United States Department of Justice and on behalf of the Office of
Inspector General (OIG-HHS) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS);
(collectively, the “United States”); HealthCare Partners Holdings, LLC, (“HCP”) dba DaVita
Medical Holdings, LLC, (“DaVita”) (“Settling Party”); James Swoben; and
(hereafter collectively referred to as “the Parties”) through their authorized representatives.
RECITALS
A.

The Settling Party is a California limited liability company with its principal place

of business in El Segundo, California. The United States contends that the Settling Party submitted
or caused to be submitted claims for payment to the Medicare Advantage Program (or Medicare
Part C), Title XVIII of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395-1395lll.
B.

Under the Medicare Advantage Program, Medicare beneficiaries who are entitled

to benefits under Part A and enrolled under Part B may enroll in Medicare Advantage Plans (MA
Plans) that are owned and operated by private Medicare Advantage Organizations (MAOs). The
Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) pays MAOs a capitated amount for each
beneficiary to provide or cover the cost of all Medicare-covered Part A and Part B benefits (except
hospice) to those beneficiaries who enroll in their plan. CMS adjusts these capitated payments to
MA Plans based on demographic factors and the health status of each plan beneficiary. To calculate
the payment amounts, CMS uses a health-based risk adjustment model – the Hierarchical
Conditions Category (“HCC”) model – that takes into account diagnoses from inpatient hospital
stays, outpatient encounters, and physician office visits as well as certain demographic factors. The
diagnosis codes used in the model are grouped into HCCs, which are categories of clinically-related
medical diagnoses. CMS assigns a relative numerical value to each HCC that correlates with
1

 predicted costs associated with treating the conditions in the category. In general, the more severe
the diagnosis or costly the associated treatment, the higher the risk score. CMS makes higher
payments to the MA Plan for beneficiaries with higher overall risk scores than for beneficiaries
with lower overall risk scores.
C.

MAOs may contract directly with healthcare providers or they may contract with

Medical Services Organizations (MSOs), which in turn either employ healthcare providers or
contract with healthcare providers. The healthcare provider or MSO agrees to provide the
healthcare services to the beneficiaries for the MAO. In exchange, the MAO agrees to pay the
healthcare provider or MSO. The payment methodology often varies by contract and may be on a
fee for service basis (whereby the MAO pays the healthcare provider or MSO a negotiated rate for
each service that it provides), a capitated basis (whereby the MAO pays the healthcare provider or
MSO a fixed amount per beneficiary), or a risk-sharing basis (whereby the MAO pays the
healthcare provider or MSO a share of the payments that the MAO receives from CMS), or some
variation of these methodologies.
D.

HCP operated an MSO and contracted with MAOs in various states. Under these

contracts, the MAOs paid HCP on a risk-sharing basis. Thus, HCP was paid more if the
beneficiaries in its care had higher risk scores because the MAO received a higher capitated
payment from CMS for those beneficiaries. In November 2012, DaVita Inc. merged with HCP.
HCP became DaVita Medical Holdings California, LLC in November 2016, and then became
DaVita Medical Holdings, LLC in April 2017.
E.

In March 2015, DaVita learned that the government was investigating HCP for risk

adjustment fraud. DaVita represents that, in late 2014 and early 2015, DaVita was investigating
and preparing a self-disclosure to the government regarding certain problematic legacy risk
adjustment practices of HCP. Beginning in April 2015 and continuing through 2017, DaVita made
2

 a series of disclosures to the government regarding the problematic risk adjustment practices that
are included in the conduct that is being settled and described below in paragraphs G(3)-(5), (7).
On July 13, 2009, Swoben filed a qui tam action in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California captioned United States ex rel. Swoben v. Secure Horizons, et al., No. 095013, pursuant to the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b) (the
“California Civil Action”). In an amended complaint, Swoben alleged, inter alia, that HCP hired
coding companies to perform retrospective reviews of its beneficiaries’ charts for the purpose of
identifying new diagnosis codes that could be submitted to Medicare in order to increase the
beneficiaries’ risk scores. HCP did not reveal to the coders which diagnosis codes had previously
been submitted to Medicare, and HCP did not compare the diagnosis codes identified by the coders
with diagnosis codes that had previously been submitted to Medicare to determine which codes
were potentially unsupported by proper documentation. Nor did HCP take corrective action with
respect to these submitted but potentially unsupported codes.
F.

G.

The United States contends that it has certain civil claims against the Settling Party
3

 arising from the Settling Party’s operations as a MSO as follows:
1.

For beneficiary encounters with HCP physicians that occurred between January
2011 and December 2012, HCP submitted to MAOs diagnosis codes and
diagnosis data that were clinically unsupported and/or undocumented.

2.

From March 2007 to December 2014, HCP retained a coding vendor, The
Coding Source, to conduct retrospective reviews of medical records, commonly
called “chart reviews,” of certain Medicare Part C patients with dates of service
from March 2007 to December 2013 under the care of the Settling Party in
California and treated by specialist providers affiliated with HCP. The Coding
Source did not review the diagnosis codes that the Settling Party had previously
reported to the MAOs for these beneficiaries. Instead, The Coding Source
identified all risk-adjusting diagnosis codes that it believed were supported by
the medical records it reviewed. In some cases, The Coding Source identified
risk-adjusting diagnosis codes that the Settling Party had not previously
submitted to the MAOs, and the Settling Party submitted those additional
diagnosis codes to the MAOs. In other cases, The Coding Source did not
identify supporting medical documentation for certain diagnosis codes that the
Settling Party had previously submitted to the MAOs and the Settling Party did
not take any corrective action with respect to these unsupported diagnosis codes.
The Settling Party has provided a list of the affected claims to the United States.

3.

HCP provided to the healthcare providers they employed or contracted with
coding guidance regarding the use of ICD-9 diagnosis code 720.1, spinal
enthesopathy. In November 2011, HCP received the results of a third-party
coding audit, which put HCP on notice that HCP health care providers were
using diagnosis code 720.1 when that code was unsupported and/or not
appropriately documented, but HCP did not take any corrective action. As a
result, the Settling Party submitted diagnosis code 720.1 to MAOs for
beneficiary encounters with HCP providers that occurred between November 1,
2011 and December 31, 2014 in its California, Florida, and Nevada markets
when that code was clinically unsupported and/or not appropriately
documented.

4.

For beneficiary encounters that occurred between November 1, 2009 through
December 31, 2012 in its California, Florida, and Nevada markets, the Settling
Party conducted audits that determined that HCP or health care providers who
contracted with HCP had submitted diagnosis data and diagnosis codes to
MAOs that were unsupported or not appropriately documented. The Settling
Party’s records do not show that the Settling Party requested that MAOs retract
the unsupported diagnosis data and diagnosis codes. The Settling Party provided
a list of the affected claims to the United States.

5.

Beginning in 2010, HCP contracted with GeriNet of Nevada (“GeriNet”) to
conduct in-home comprehensive evaluations of beneficiaries under the care of
4

 HCP in the Nevada market. GeriNet providers assigned diagnosis codes to
beneficiaries based on those in-home evaluations, which HCP in turn submitted
to MA Plans. The Settling Party did not consistently audit the documentation for
these diagnosis codes. In 2016, the Settling Party determined that from 2010
through January 2016, GeriNet providers submitted unsupported or
undocumented diagnosis codes to the Settling Party, which the Settling Party
submitted to the MA Plans. The Settling Party provided a list of the affected
claims to the United States.
6.

For beneficiary encounters that occurred between November 1, 2009 through
February 2012, health care providers employed by HCP in California and
Nevada used an electronic health records system, Touchworks, which
improperly mapped conditions chosen by the provider to ICD-9 diagnosis codes
that affected a beneficiary’s risk score when the condition selected did not
necessarily support that diagnosis code. As a result, HCP submitted to MAOs
the following codes that were unsupported or not appropriately documented:
262, 263.0, 263.1, 263.9, 714.0, 707.0, and 707.9 in California and 263.9 and
714.0 in Nevada.

7.

For beneficiary encounters that occurred between November 1, 2009 through
December 31, 2015, the Settling Party improperly submitted to MA plans acute
care condition diagnosis codes, ICD-9 CM 038.9, 410.00, 410.10, 410.70,
410.80, 410.90, 410.91, 411.1, 434.01, 434.11, 434.91, 436, 518.81, 518.82, and
518.84 in California; 410,70, 410.90, 411.1, 434.91, 436, 518.81, 518.82, and
518.84 in Nevada; and 410.90, 411.1, 434.91, 436, and 518.81 in Florida when
those beneficiary encounters occurred in the office of a primary care physician
employed by or affiliated with the Settling Party and when the diagnosis code
was unsupported or not appropriately documented.

The United States contends that the Settling Party’s knowing submission of the unsupported and/or
undocumented codes identified above caused CMS to make inflated payments to the MAOs. The
United States further contends that the knowing failure to delete the unsupported and/or
undocumented diagnosis codes caused the MAOs to retain payments from CMS to which they were
not otherwise entitled, and allowed the Settling Party to avoid negative adjustments in payments it
received from the MAOs.

5

 The foregoing is referred to in this
Agreement as the Covered Conduct.
H.

This Settlement Agreement is neither an admission of liability by the Settling Party

nor a concession by the United States that its claims are not well founded.
I.

Swoben and

claim entitlement under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d) to a share of the

proceeds of this Settlement Agreement.

claims entitlement to reasonable expenses, attorneys’

fees, and costs from the Settling Party under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d).
J.

To avoid the delay, uncertainty, inconvenience, and expense of protracted litigation

of the above claims, and in consideration of the mutual promises and obligations of this Settlement
Agreement, the Parties agree and covenant as follows:

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1.

The Settling Party shall pay to the United States a total of two hundred seventy million
6

 dollars ($270,000,000) (“Settlement Amount”), of which one hundred six million five hundred fiftyone thousand two hundred four dollars ($106,551,204) is restitution. The United States has credited
the Settling Party for seventy-five million four hundred twenty-two thousand two hundred twentytwo dollars ($75,422,222) through the Medicare Risk Adjustment Reconciliation process. The
Settling Party shall pay the remainder one hundred ninety-four million seven hundred seventyseven thousand seven hundred seventy-eight dollars ($194,777,778), plus accrued interest in the
amount of 2.875 percent per annum from October 8, 2018 and continuing until and including the
date of payment, no later than 10 days after the Effective Date of this Agreement by electronic
funds transfer pursuant to written instructions to be provided by the United States Attorney's Office
for the Central District of California. The Settlement Amount does not include the amount of
fees and costs, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d), which are to be separately resolved.
2.

Conditioned upon the United States receiving the Settlement Amount from the

Settling Party and as soon as feasible after receipt, the United States shall pay ten million one
hundred ninety-nine thousand one hundred dollars ($10,199,100) to Swoben by electronic funds
transfer. Some of the Settlement Amount paid by the Settling Party under this Agreement shall be
considered as consideration for the dismissal of the California Civil Action against the Settling
Party.
3.

Conditioned upon the United States receiving the Settlement Amount from the

Settling Party and as soon as feasible after receipt, the United States shall pay one million six
hundred forty-nine thousand six hundred dollars ($1,649,600) to

by electronic funds

transfer.
4.

Subject to the exceptions in Paragraph 7 (concerning excluded claims) below, and

conditioned upon the Settling Party’s full payment of the Settlement Amount, the United States
releases the Settling Party together with its current or former parent corporations; direct and indirect
7

 subsidiaries; brother or sister corporations; divisions; current or former corporate owners; the
corporate successors and assigns of any of them; DaVita Medical Group Nevada (Coats), Ltd;
DaVita Medical Group California, P.C.; DaVita Medical Group Associates California, Inc.;
HealthCare Partners Affiliates Medical Group and its subsidiary medical groups; DaVita Medical
Group ARTA Health Network California, P.C.; and DaVita Medical Group ARTA Western
California, Inc. from any civil or administrative monetary claim the United States has for the
Covered Conduct under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733; the Civil Monetary
Penalties Law, 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7a; the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 38013812; any statutory provision creating a cause of action for civil damages or civil penalties which
the Civil Division of the Department of Justice has actual and present authority to assert and
compromise pursuant to 28 C.F.R. Part 0, Subpart I, 0.45(d), or the common law theories of
payment by mistake, unjust enrichment, and fraud.
5.

Subject to the exceptions in Paragraph 7 below, and conditioned upon the Settling

Party’s full payment of the Settlement Amount, Swoben, for himself and for his heirs, successors,
attorneys, agents, and assigns, releases the Settling Party, together with its current or former parent
corporations; direct and indirect subsidiaries; brother or sister corporations; divisions; current or
former corporate owners; and the corporate successors and assigns; and its past, present and future
officers, directors, agents, attorneys, and employees, in their individual and official capacities, from
any civil monetary claim Swoben has on behalf of the United States for the Covered Conduct under
the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733, and from any and all claims for relief, actions,
rights, causes of action, suits, debts, obligations, liabilities, demands, losses, damages (including
treble damages and any civil penalties), punitive damages, costs and expenses of any kind,
character, or nature whatsoever, whether known or unknown, fixed or contingent, in law or in
equity, in contract or in tort, under any federal or state statute or regulation, or in common law, that
8

 Swoben, his heirs, successors, attorneys, agents and assigns asserted or could have asserted against
the Settling Party. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as a release by Swoben for any civil
monetary claim Swoben has or may have on behalf of the United States under the False Claims Act,
31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733 that is not otherwise expressly included in the Covered Conduct.
6.

Subject to the exceptions in Paragraph below, and conditioned upon the Settling

Party’s full payment of the Settlement Amount,

, for himself and for his heirs, successors,

attorneys, agents, and assigns, releases the Settling Party, together with its current or former parent
corporations; direct and indirect subsidiaries; brother or sister corporations; divisions; current or
former corporate owners; and the corporate successors and assigns; and its past, present and future
officers, directors, agents, attorneys, and employees, in their individual and official capacities, from
any civil monetary claim

has on behalf of the United States for the Covered Conduct under

the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733, and from any and all claims for relief, actions,
rights, causes of action, suits, debts, obligations, liabilities, demands, losses, damages (including
treble damages and any civil penalties), punitive damages, costs and expenses of any kind,
character, or nature whatsoever, whether known or unknown, fixed or contingent, in law or in
equity, in contract or in tort, under any federal or state statute or regulation, or in common law, that
, his heirs, successors, attorneys, agents and assigns asserted or could have asserted against
the Settling Party, except to the extent provided under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d) for expenses, attorneys’
fees, and costs. In addition, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as a release by
(i) any civil monetary claim

for:

has or may have on behalf of the United States under the False

Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733 that is not otherwise expressly included in the Covered
Conduct; (ii) any claim
occurs after

has or may have against the Settling Party as a result of conduct that

execution of this Agreement; and (iii) any claim, payment, or obligation owed

by the Settling Party to

under the consulting agreement between DaVita, Inc. and
9

 dated December 1, 2016.
7.

Notwithstanding the releases given in paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 this Agreement, or any

other term of this Agreement, the following claims of the United States are specifically reserved
and are not released:
a.

Any liability arising under Title 26, U.S. Code (Internal Revenue Code);

b.

Any criminal liability;

c.

Except as explicitly stated in this Agreement, any administrative liability,
including mandatory or permissive exclusion from Federal health care
programs;

d.

Any liability to the United States (or its agencies) for any conduct that is not
otherwise expressly included in the Covered Conduct;

e.

Any liability based upon obligations created by this Agreement;

f.

Any liability of individuals;

g.

Any liability for failure to deliver goods or services due; and

h.

Any liability for personal injury or property damage or for other
consequential damages arising from the Covered Conduct.

8.

Swoben and his heirs, successors, attorneys, agents, and assigns shall not object to this

Agreement but agree and confirm that this Agreement is fair, adequate, and reasonable under all the
circumstances, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(2)(B).
9.

and his heirs, successors, attorneys, agents, and assigns shall not object to this

Agreement but agree and confirm that this Agreement is fair, adequate, and reasonable under all the
circumstances, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(2)(B).
10.

Conditioned upon Swoben’s receipt of the payment described in Paragraph 2,

Swoben and his heirs, successors, attorneys, agents, and assigns fully and finally release, waive,
10

 and forever discharge the United States, its agencies, of?cers, agents, employees, and servants,
from any claims against the Settling Party arising from the ?ling of the California Civil Action or
rmder 31 U.S.C. 3730, and from any claims to a share of the proceeds of this Agreement and/or
the California Civil Action against the Settling Party.

11. Conditioned upon- receipt of the payment described in Paragraph 3, -
and his heirs, successors, attorneys, agents, and assigns fully and ?nally release, waive, and forever
discharge the United States, its agencies, of?cers, agents, employees, and servants, from any claims

arising ??om the settlement of the Covered Conduct as alleged? or

under 31 U.S.C. 3730, and ??om any claims to a share of the proceeds of this Agreement.

12. The Settling Party waives and shall not assert any defenses it may have to any
criminal prosecution or administrative action relating to the Covered Conduct that may be based in
whole or in part on a contention that, under the Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment of
the Constitution, or under the Excessive Fines Clause in the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution,
this Agreement bars a remedy sought in such criminal prosecution or administrative action.

13. The Settling Party fully and ?nally releases the United States, its agencies, of?cers,
agents, employees, and servants, from any claims (including attorney?s fees, costs, and expenses of
every kind and however denominated) that the Settling Party asserted, could have asserted, or may
assert in the future against the United States, and its agencies, of?cers, agents, employees, and
servants related to the Covered Conduct and the United States? investigation and prosecution
thereof.

14. The Settlement Amormt shall not be decreased as a result of the denial of claims for
payment now being withheld from payment by any MAO related to the Covered Conduct; and the
Settling Party agrees not to resubmit or to cause any other person or entity to resubmit to any MAO

any previously denied claims related to the Covered Conduct, agrees not to appeal any such denials

11

of claims, and agrees to withdraw any such pending appeals.
15.

The Settling Party agrees to the following:
a.

Unallowable Costs Defined: All costs (as defined in the Federal
Acquisition Regulation, 48 C.F.R. § 31.205-47; and in Titles XVIII and XIX
of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395-1395kkk-1 and 1396-1396w-5;
and the regulations and official program directives promulgated thereunder)
incurred by or on behalf of the Settling Party’s, their present or former
officers, directors, employees, shareholders, and agents in connection with:
(1)

the matters covered by this Agreement;

(2)

the United States’ audit(s) and civil investigation(s) of the matters
covered by this Agreement;

(3)

the Settling Party’s investigation, defense, and corrective actions
undertaken in response to the United States’ audit(s) and civil
investigation(s) in connection with the matters covered by this
Agreement (including attorney’s fees);

(4)

the negotiation and performance of this Agreement; and

(5)

the payment the Settling Party makes to the United States pursuant to
this Agreement are unallowable costs for government contracting
purposes and under the Medicare Program, Medicaid Program,
TRICARE Program, and Federal Employees Health Benefits Program
(FEHBP) (hereinafter referred to as Unallowable Costs).

b.

Future Treatment of Unallowable Costs: Unallowable Costs shall be
separately determined and accounted for by the Settling Party, and the
Settling Party shall not charge such Unallowable Costs directly or indirectly
12

 to any contracts with the United States or any State Medicaid program, or
seek payment for such Unallowable Costs through any cost report, cost
statement, information statement, or payment request submitted by the
Settling Party or any of their subsidiaries or affiliates to the Medicare,
Medicaid, TRICARE, or FEHBP Programs.
c.

Treatment of Unallowable Costs Previously Submitted for Payment: The
Settling Party further agrees that within 90 days of the Effective Date of this
Agreement it shall identify to applicable Medicare and TRICARE fiscal
intermediaries, carriers, and/or contractors, and Medicaid and FEHBP fiscal
agents, any Unallowable Costs (as defined in this Paragraph) included in
payments previously sought from the United States, or any State Medicaid
program, including, but not limited to, payments sought in any cost reports,
cost statements, information reports, or payment requests already submitted
by the Settling Party or any of their subsidiaries or affiliates, and shall
request, and agree, that such cost reports, cost statements, information
reports, or payment requests, even if already settled, be adjusted to account
for the effect of the inclusion of the unallowable costs. The Settling Party
agrees that the United States, at a minimum, shall be entitled to recoup from
the Settling Party any overpayment plus applicable interest and penalties as a
result of the inclusion of such Unallowable Costs on previously- submitted
cost reports, information reports, cost statements, or requests for payment.
Any payments due after the adjustments have been made shall be paid
to the United States pursuant to the direction of the Department of Justice
and/or the affected agencies. The United States reserves its rights to disagree
13

 with any calculations submitted by the Settling Party or any of its
subsidiaries or affiliates on the effect of inclusion of Unallowable Costs (as
defined in this Paragraph) on the Settling Party or any of its subsidiaries or
affiliates’ cost reports, cost statements, or information reports.
d.

Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of the rights of the
United States to audit, examine, or re-examine the Settling Party’s books and
records to determine that no Unallowable Costs have been claimed in
accordance with the provisions of this Paragraph.

16.

The Settling Party agrees to cooperate fully and truthfully with the United States’

investigation of individuals and entities not released in this Agreement; specifically, upon
reasonable notice, the Settling Party shall encourage, and agrees not to impair, the cooperation of its
directors, officers, and employees, and shall use its best efforts to make available, and encourage,
the cooperation of former directors, officers, and employees for interviews and testimony,
consistent with the rights and privileges of such individuals. The Settling Party further agrees to
furnish to the United States, upon request, complete and unredacted copies of all non-privileged
documents, reports, memoranda of interviews, and records in its possession, custody, or control
concerning any investigation of the Covered Conduct that it has undertaken, or that has been
performed by another on its behalf.
17.

This Agreement is intended to be for the benefit of the Parties only. The Parties do not

release any claims against any other person or entity, except to the extent provided for in Paragraphs
4-6 (releases for Settling Party, related entities, and individuals) and 18 (waiver for beneficiaries
paragraph), below.
18.

The Settling Party agrees that it waives and shall not seek payment for any of the

health care billings covered by this Agreement from any health care beneficiaries or their parents,
14

 sponsors, legally responsible individuals, or third party payors based upon the claims defined as
Covered Conduct.
19.

Each Party shall bear its own legal and other costs incurred in connection with this

matter, including the preparation and performance of this Agreement, except for

claims

against the Settling Party under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d) for expenses or attorneys’ fees and costs.
20.

Each party and signatory to this Agreement represents that it freely and voluntarily

enters into this Agreement without any degree of duress or compulsion.
21.

This Agreement is governed by the laws of the United States. The exclusive

jurisdiction and venue for any dispute relating to this Agreement is the United States District Court
for the District of Colorado. For purposes of construing this Agreement, this Agreement shall be
deemed to have been drafted by all Parties to this Agreement and shall not, therefore, be construed
against any Party for that reason in any subsequent dispute.
22.

This Agreement constitutes the complete agreement between the Parties. This

Agreement may not be amended except by written consent of the Parties.
23.

The undersigned counsel represent and warrant that they are fully authorized to

execute this Agreement on behalf of the persons and entities indicated below.
24.

This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which constitutes an

original and all of which constitute one and the same Agreement.
25.

All parties agree that this Agreement may not be disclosed to the public in

unredacted form until

. Prior to any disclosure of

the Agreement, all parties must agree upon redactions to remove identifying information about
. All parties consent to the United States’ disclosure of such
redacted Agreement, and information about this Agreement that does not disclose redacted
information, to the public.
15

 26.

All parties consent to the United States’ disclosure of this Agreement, and

information about this Agreement, to the public.
27.

This Agreement is effective on the date of signature of the last signatory to the

Agreement (Effective Date of this Agreement). Facsimiles and electronic transmissions of
signatures shall constitute acceptable, binding signatures for purposes of this Agreement.

16

 DATED: 

DATED:

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY:

J. Jeh?ii?r Koh

Olga Yevtukhova

Jessica Krieg

Zoila E. Hinson

Trial Attorney

Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division
United States Department of Justice

 

Greg Demske

Chief Counsel

Of?ce of Counsel to the Inspector General

Of?ce of Inspector General

United States Department of Health and Human Services

 

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DATED: BY:

DATED: fizz/52 8 BY:

 

J. Jennifer Koh

Olga Yevtukhova

Jessica Krieg

Zoila E. Hinson

Trial Attorney

Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division
United States Department of Justice

5" 

Greg Demske

Chief Counsel

Of?ce of Counsel to the Inspector General .

Of?ce of Inspector General

United States Department of Health and Human Services

17



DATED: BY: a} 9%

Kent Thiryy
DaVita Medical Holdings LLC

DATED: 8? BY: W)
Jaime L.M. ones Scum! ?ush?) 

DATED:

7/4811?

BY:

Counsel for DaVita, Inc.

2% ?aw/w,

Paul E. Kalb "Sally Msh?n 

Counsel for DaVita Inc.

1697163 Swoben

BY: Dan/Mo 

 

DATED: BY:

 

William K. Hanagami 
Counsel for James Swoben

l9

 

30