Skip to content

ADVOCATETANMOY LAW LIBRARY

Research & Library Database

Primary Menu
  • News
  • Opinion
  • Countries198
    • National Constitutions: History, Purpose, and Key Aspects
  • Judgment
  • Book
  • Legal Brief
    • Legal Eagal
  • LearnToday
  • HLJ
    • Supreme Court Case Notes
    • Daily Digest
  • Sarvarthapedia
    • Sarvarthapedia (Core Areas)
    • Systemic-and-systematic
    • Volume One
04/04/2026
  • Law Library

Booz Allen Settles $15.875M Fraud Claim with U.S.

On January 3, 2025, Booz Allen Hamilton announced a settlement to pay $15.875 million to the United States, resolving allegations of False Claims Act violations. These allegations involved Booz Allen's subsidiary, BES, knowingly submitting fraudulent claims related to a GSA task order for military training simulators intended for the Department of Defense. The misconduct, attributed to former program managers and a civilian Air Force employee, was facilitated by the unauthorized sharing of confidential government contracting information. The settlement reflects ongoing efforts to uphold procurement integrity and holds accountable those undermining the defense contracting process, with prior criminal charges already resolved.
advtanmoy 04/01/2025 4 minutes read

ยฉ Advocatetanmoy Law Library

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Department-of-Justice-USA

Home ยป Law Library Updates ยป Law Library ยป Booz Allen Settles $15.875M Fraud Claim with U.S.

January 3, 2025

Press Release

Booz Allen Agrees to Pay $15.875M to Settle False Claims Act Allegations

Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation (Booz Allen) has agreed to pay the United States $15,875,000 to resolve allegations that Booz Allen Hamilton Engineering Services LLC (BES), a wholly owned subsidiary of Booz Allen, violated the False Claims Act by knowingly submitting fraudulent claims to the United States in connection with a General Services Administration (GSA) task order to supply computer military training simulators and systems to Department of Defense (DoD) agencies, including the Air Force. Booz Allen, which is headquartered in McLean, Virginia, provides a range of management, consulting and engineering services to the government. BES was an engineering services firm located in Annapolis Junction, Maryland, with offices in Dayton, Ohio, and other locations.

Read Next

  • THE NATIONAL SPORTS GOVERNANCE ACT, 2025
  • 2016 Report of Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt of India
  • The Number ฯ€ (Pi): History, Properties, and Importance in Mathematics

The settlement announced today resolves allegations that BES, through its former program managers John G. Hancock and Karen K. Paulsen, knowingly engaged in a fraudulent course of conduct with Keith A. Seguin, then a civilian Air Force employee and contracting official, and David J. Bolduc Jr., the co-owner and manager of a BES subcontractor, QuantaDyn Corporation, that resulted in GSA awarding BES a task order for training simulators. BES, in turn, awarded task orders (or โ€œmodulesโ€) to QuantaDyn. The government alleges that Seguin improperly and illegally divulged confidential government contracting and budget information, a competitorโ€™s confidential bid or proposal information and source selection information to Hancock and Paulsen, who used the illicit information despite knowing they were not authorized to possess it. Through this conduct, Hancock and Paulsen successfully influenced GSA to award the task order to BES.

Additionally, the government alleges that, after the GSA award, Hancock, Paulsen, Seguin and Bolduc made use of confidential government budget information to formulate and submit price quotes to GSA for the individual modules that BES awarded to QuantaDyn on a sole-source basis. As a result of the conduct described above, BES, through Hancock and Paulsen, knowingly submitted fraudulent claims to GSA under the 37 modules awarded to QuantaDyn, which GSA paid. Hancock, Paulsen, Seguin and Bolduc previously resolved criminal charges related to this conduct.

โ€œGovernment contractors that improperly receive confidential government information during the procurement process corrupt the integrity of that process,โ€ said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton, head of the Justice Departmentโ€™s Civil Division. โ€œThis settlement demonstrates our continuing commitment to protecting the integrity of the governmentโ€™s procurement process.โ€

โ€œOver the past several years, my office has used every tool at its disposal โ€” from civil settlements to criminal prosecution to asset forfeiture โ€” to hold accountable the companies and individuals that helped a corrupt federal employee at Randolph Air Force Base defraud the United States by steering training simulator contracts,โ€ said U.S. Attorney Jaime Esparza for the Western District of Texas. โ€œI am grateful for the assistance of the Department of Justiceโ€™s Civil Division and our law enforcement partners in finally closing the book on this fraud scheme with the civil settlement announced today.โ€

Read Next

  • THE NATIONAL SPORTS GOVERNANCE ACT, 2025
  • 2016 Report of Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt of India
  • The Number ฯ€ (Pi): History, Properties, and Importance in Mathematics

โ€œThis case demonstrates the unwavering dedication of the DoD Office of Inspector Generalโ€™s Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS), along with our law enforcement partners, to aggressively pursue those who undermine the integrity of the DoD contracting process,โ€ said the Honorable Robert P. Storch, Inspector General of the Department of Defense. โ€œThis settlement announcement highlights the steadfast commitment of DCIS and our investigative partners to holding accountable those who seek to enrich themselves by jeopardizing the welfare of Americaโ€™s warfighter and defrauding American taxpayers.โ€

โ€œThe GSA Office of Inspector General will continue working with law enforcement partners to protect taxpayer dollars and the integrity of federal contracting,โ€ said GSA Deputy Inspector General Robert C. Erickson.

The civil resolution obtained in this matter was the result of a coordinated effort between the Civil Divisionโ€™s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, and the U.S. Attorneyโ€™s Office for the Western District of Texas, with assistance from the GSA Office of Inspector General (OIG); DCIS; and the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), Headquarters, Operations Investigative Support Division (OIS).

Read Next

  • THE NATIONAL SPORTS GOVERNANCE ACT, 2025
  • 2016 Report of Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt of India
  • The Number ฯ€ (Pi): History, Properties, and Importance in Mathematics

Attorneys Seth W. Greene and Art J. Coulter of the Civil Divisionโ€™s Fraud Section, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas A. Parnham Jr. for the Western District of Texas handled the matter, with assistance from GSA OIG Special Agent Gregory A. Fallecker.

In September 2020, the United States entered into a civil settlement agreement with QuantaDyn and William T. Dunn Jr., the majority owner, president and CEO of QuantaDyn.

The claims resolved by the United States are allegations only. There has been no determination of liability.


Tags: 3rd January Department of Justice Fraud Press-Release Settlement Agreement

Post navigation

Previous: Succession Within The Department of Justice: Biden’s EO
Next: Jake Sullivan’s Visit to India: Strengthening US-India Relations
Arrest
Sarvarthapedia

Latin Maxims in Criminal Law: Meaning, Usage, and Courtroom Application

Sarvarthapedia
Sarvarthapedia

Research Methodology and Investigation: Concepts, Frameworks, and Emerging Trends

Rule of Law vs Rule by Law and Rule for Law: History, Meaning, and Global Evolution

IPS Cadre Strength 2025: State-wise Authorised Strength

Uric Acid: From 18th Century Discovery to Modern Medical Science

Christian Approaches to Interfaith Dialogue: Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, and Pentecostal Views

Origin of Central Banking in India: From Hastings to RBI and the History of Preparatory Years (1773โ€“1934)

Howrah District Environment Plan: Waste Management, Water Quality & Wetland Conservation

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023: Sections (1-358), Punishments, and Legal Framework

Bengali Food Culture: History, Traditions, and Class Influences

West Bengal Court-Fees Act, 1970: Fees, Schedules, and Procedures

WB Land Reforms Tribunal Act 1997: History, Features, Provisions, Structure, Powers and Functions

Civil Procedure Law of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (1976)

Knowledge Management in the Modern Era: From History to Digital Transformation

  • Sarvarthapedia

  • Delhi Law Digest

  • Howrah Law Journal

  • Amit Aryaย vs Kamlesh Kumari:ย Doctrine of merger
  • David Vs. Kuruppampady: SLP against rejecting review by HC (2020)
  • Nazim & Ors. v. State of Uttarakhand (2025 INSC 1184)
  • Geeta v. Ajay: Expense for daughter`s marriage allowed in favour of the wife
  • Ram v. Sukhram: Tribal women’s right in ancestral property [2025] 8 SCR 272
  • Naresh vs Aarti: Cheque Bouncing Complaint Filed by POA (02/01/2025)
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (BNSS)
  • Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 (BSA): Indian Rules for Evidence
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023
  • The Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)
  • Supreme Court Daily Digest
  • U.S. Supreme Court Orders
  • U.k. Supreme Court Orders
Sarvarthapedia, Law and Legal Materials

Rule of Law vs Rule by Law and Rule for Law: History, Meaning, and Global Evolution

Indian Government

IPS Cadre Strength 2025: State-wise Authorised Strength

Sarvarthapedia

Uric Acid: From 18th Century Discovery to Modern Medical Science

Christian Education

Christian Approaches to Interfaith Dialogue: Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, and Pentecostal Views

2026 ยฉ Advocatetanmoy Law Library

  • About
  • Global Index
  • Judicial Examinations
  • Indian Statutes
  • Glossary
  • Legal Eagle
  • Subject Guide
  • Journal
  • SCCN
  • Constitutions
  • Legal Brief (SC)
  • MCQs (Indian Laws)
  • Sarvarthapedia (Articles)
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • FAQs
  • Library Updates