Former Five Term Congressman, Brad Miller, Joins GBB

WASHINGTON, Oct. 18, 2017 – Brad Miller, a former five term Congressman from North Carolina’s 13th Congressional District has joined the Washington, D.C.-headquartered whistleblower and complex litigation boutique, Guttman, Buschner & Brooks PLLC (GBB).

GBB is one of the nation’s leading complex litigation firms with particular expertise in representing whistleblowers. On behalf of its whistleblower clients, firm attorneys have recovered close to $5.5 billion for state and federal governments under False Claims Act. Most recently, the firm served as lead counsel in U.S. ex rel. Brown v. Celgene, which resulted in the recovery of $280 million for the federal government and state governments in July 2017.

Miller served in the North Carolina House of Representatives from 1993-1994, the North Carolina Senate from 1997 to 2002, and the United States House of Representatives from 2003 through 2013. An expert in the area of banking and financial services, Miller was a member of the House Financial Services Committee where he was one of the architects of the 2008 financial reform legislation, the Dodd-Frank Act, especially the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and other consumer protections.

Miller earned his undergraduate degree from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; he received a Master’s Degree from the London School of Economics and law degree from Columbia Law School. After graduation he served as a Clerk to Judge J. Dickson Phillips of the United States Court of Appeal for the Fourth Circuit. Before entering politics Miller was a trial lawyer in Raleigh, North Carolina.

“Brad Miller brings with him a deep knowledge of securities and finance laws along with laws governing pension funds and the protection of retiree benefits. His expertise is a perfect fit for GBB and the firm’s expansion plans,” said GBB Founding Partner, Justin Brooks.

“Our goal has been to build a firm with attorneys who are prominent in their areas and want to use their talents to advance the rule of law for the public interest,” said Founding Partner Reuben Guttman.

“There has been far too much misconduct in the financial sector,” Miller said, “and far too little accountability. The firm wants to take that misconduct on, and so do I.”

“The firm did good and important work to hold the mortgage industry accountable for foreclosure fraud,” Miller said. “There is much more to be done.”

GBB current attorneys include a former Commissioner of the OSHA Review Commission, a law professor who is a national expert on complex litigation and trial practice, a former attorney with the FDA and the EPA who also holds a medical license and continues to practice, and former federal law clerks and prosecutors.

About Guttman, Buschner & Brooks PLLC
Guttman Buschner & Brooks PLLC (GBB) is an elite litigation boutique with offices in Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, PA, and Wilmington, DE. More information on GBB can be found at In addition to the recent Celgene litigation, attorneys at the firm represented the lead whistleblower in U.S. ex rel. McCoyd v, Abbott Labs, which involved the recovery of $1.6 billion for the government; one of six whistleblowers in U.S. ex rel. Graydon v. GSK which resulted in the recovery of $1.04 billion, one of the whistleblowers in U.S. ex rel. Demott v Pfizer which resulted in the recovery of $2.3 billion; the lead whistleblowers in U.S. ex rel. Sandler and Paris v. Pfizer, which resulted in recovery of $257.4 million; the lead whistleblower in U.S. ex rel. Szymoniak v. Bank of America, which resulted in the recovery of $95 million; three of the whistleblowers in U.S. ex rel. Doghramji v CHS, which resulted in the recovery of $97 million; the lead whistleblower in U.S, ex rel. Kurnik v. Amgen, which resulted in the aggregate recovery of $30 million from Amgen, Inc., Omnicare, and PharMerica Corp.; and U.S. ex rel. Abrahamsen v. Hudson Valley, which resulted in a recovery of $5.5 million to the federal government and state government.

Federal prosecutors launch investigation of prominent surgeon who double-booked operations

By Jonathan Saltzman GLOBE STAFF OCTOBER 05, 2017

Federal prosecutors are investigating the billing practices of one of the nation’s highest-paid surgeons after a Spotlight Team report detailed that Dr. David B. Samadi ran two surgeries simultaneously on hundreds of occasions — a routine that colleagues said many patients did not know about.

Samadi, the chief of urology at Lenox Hill Hospital in Manhattan and a medical expert on Fox News, already is the focus of a state inquiry into how he handles his enormous caseload of prostate surgeries. Current and former Lenox Hill medical personnel say he typically relied on unsupervised residents who were still learning how to do surgery.

Now, the US attorney’s office in Manhattan is looking at Samadi, too. Federal law prohibits surgeons at teaching hospitals from billing Medicare for two simultaneous operations unless the doctor was present for all “critical parts.”

. . .

Reuben Guttman, a Washington, D.C., lawyer who has represented clients in federal cases alleging health-care fraud, said it was extraordinary for a prosecutor to disclose an open investigation.

The e-mail to the Globe, he said, was a “clear signal that the matter of concurrent surgeries is extremely material to the payment of Medicare and Medicaid funds.”

. . . .

read the full article here.

Brad Miller

tbuschnerBrad Miller
Of Counsel

(202) 800-3001

Government Experience
United States House of
Representatives (2003-2013)
North Carolina House of
Representatives (1993-1994)
North Carolina Senate (1997-2002)
Law Clerk, The Hon. J. Dickson
Phillips, Jr., Fourth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals

Columbia University (J.D., 1979)
London School of Economics (M.Sc.,
University of North Carolina (B.A.,

North Carolina
United States Fourth Circuit Court of
U.S. District Courts for the Eastern
and Middle Districts of North

Whistle-blower files suit over alleged double-booked surgeries

By Jonathan Saltzman and Todd Wallack – GLOBE STAFF JUNE 07, 2017

Orthopedic surgeons at Massachusetts General Hospital repeatedly kept patients waiting under anesthesia longer — sometimes more than an hour longer — than was medically necessary or safe, as they juggled two or even three simultaneous operations, according to a federal lawsuit that alleges frequent billing fraud at the prestigious hospital.

Dr. Lisa Wollman, a former anesthesiologist at Mass. General, alleges in the lawsuit that at least five surgeons endangered patients by regularly performing simultaneous surgeries. Wollman charges that the doctors also defrauded the government by submitting bills for surgeries in which they were not in the operating room for critical portions of procedures, leaving the work to unsupervised trainees.

Wollman said she witnessed surgeons performing simultaneous operations repeatedly from 2010 to 2015, when she left MGH for New England Baptist Hospital. She said hospital policy gave the doctors financial incentives to do more procedures, and they never told patients they would be going back and forth between operating rooms.

. . .

Wollman’s lead attorney, Reuben Guttman of Washington, D.C., argues that the doctors violated rules for two government health insurance programs, Medicare and Medicaid, which require surgeons to be present for all “critical portions” of an operation in order to get paid. If surgeons weren’t present and billed the insurers without making their role clear, it could constitute billing fraud, though the rule has seldom been enforced.

. . .

Guttman, Wollman’s attorney, said it was premature to talk about the damages if Mass. General is found to have improperly billed Medicaid and Medicare, but the costs could be considerable. The law calls for treble damages and Mass. General could face an additional penalty of at least $5,000 for each instance of improper billing, Guttman said. If Wollman prevails, he added, she could potentially receive 25 percent to 30 percent of any money recovered under the False Claims Act.

Read Full Article here.

Amicus of Certain Members of Congress Opposing Motion to Dismiss in United States v Arpaio

United States of America,
Joseph M. Arpaio


The amici curiae are members of Congress. They are Representatives John Conyers, Jr.; Jerrold Nadler; Zoe Lofgren; Sheila Jackson Lee; Steve Cohen; Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr.; Theodore Deutch; Karen Bass; Cedric L. Richmond; Luis V. Gutierrez; David N. Cicilline; Ted Lieu; Pramila Jayapal; Jackie Speier; Raúl M. Grijalva; Joseph Crowley; Linda Sanchez; Bennie G. Thompson; Keith Ellison; Adriano Espaillat; Ro Khanna; Ruben Gallego; Norma J. Torres; Eleanor Holmes Norton; Jimmy Gomez; Dwight Evans; Juan Vargas; Nydia M. Velazquez; Jim Costa; Colleen Hanabusa; Frank Pallone, Jr.; Grace F. Napolitano; and Barbara Lee.

The amici have an interest in protecting the division of powers among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government set forth in the Constitution. The amici regard that division of government powers as essential to the preservation of liberty, as did the framers.

The amici oppose Defendant Joseph M. Arpaio’s Motion for Vacatur and Dismissal with Prejudice. The presidential pardon upon which that motion is based is an encroachment by the Executive on the independence of the Judiciary. The amici urge the Court to defend jealously against that encroachment as the framers intended.

. . . .

Amincus in US v Arpaio.