Search Site
Menu
Convicted Brothers Ask for New Trial Based on Government’s Deal with Whistleblowers

Legal counsel for the U.S. government is pushing back against an effort for a new trial from two brothers convicted for their roles in a scheme to misuse H-1B work visas. According to an opposition brief, government attorneys say the brothers have presented no new evidence that would overturn the original ruling.

Atul and Jiten Nanda argue that the government offered unwritten plea deals to witnesses in the case, promising not to deport them in exchange for providing damaging testimony against the brothers. However, the government stands firm that there is no evidence that such deals were offered and that the Nandas are relying solely on speculation and conjecture.

Government lawyers further stated that the brothers were fully aware of the government’s interactions with the witnesses, who all worked for the Nandas’ information technology consulting firm, Dibon Solutions. In the original case, which involved a November 2015 jury verdict, Atul and Jiten Nanda were each convicted on a single count of conspiracy to commit visa fraud, along with counts of conspiracy to harbor illegal aliens and four counts of wire fraud.

At issue in the case were allegations that the Nandas sponsored workers through the federal H-1B visa program, meant for professionals who have unique skills in specialized occupations. While the brothers claimed that they were providing full-time work to these workers, they actually paid them on an “as-needed” basis, and did not provide them with compensation when there was no work available.

During sentencing, attorneys with the government asked that the witnesses receive fines of $10,000 or less so that their offenses would not be considered felonies, which would subject them to deportation proceedings.

This case likely arose when one or more whistleblowers decided to cooperate with government investigators. If you are aware of wrongdoing within your business or organization, consult an experienced Dallas attorney at Whistleblower Law for Managers.

Honors
Our Office
  • Dallas Office
    4514 Cole Ave
    #600
    Dallas, Texas 75205
    Phone: 214-306-8045
    Fax: 469-729-9926
Testimonials
  • "Steve Kardell was terrific in representing me in some very adversarial discussions with Citigroup and also later represented me in my testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission."  -Richard Bowen, Citigroup Whistleblower

  • "Never thought my career would end like it did after 30 years of service. I was part of the first round of the so called reduction of force. I asked myself how can I be part of this with 30 years of seniority. How did they pick these 90 plus employees? Now, the culture of this organization made you question every decision they made. It wasn’t what you knew it’s was a culture of who you know. Nonetheless, I did not accept their severance package. I immediately starting looking for an attorney who would take on my case. After the initial call to Steve I had hope again. He was open and honest about everything and reassured me he would do his best for me, and he did. I had an awesome outcome. Thanks Steve you’re the best."  -S.S.

  • "Reaching out to Steve Kardell was the best decision I made. His ability to provide immediate insight and direction was very powerful, and a huge relief during a very stressful time period. For anyone struggling with a whistleblower situation, I would highly recommend at least speaking with Steve. After a 10 minute call with him, I had a better understanding of what I was dealing with. Even better, he gave me some immediate hope. In the end Steve did a better job than I thought was possible. Steve was able to get in contact with people in my organization, that I didn’t have access to. Because of his years of experience, he already has contacts in many organizations in Dallas. The entire situation was handled peacefully. I was impressed by his ability to “keep the peace”–rather than creating a battle with the organization. The reason I didn’t reach out to a lawyer initially, was because I thought it would mean an immediate end to any hope of a positive relationship with the company. Steve was able to address my concerns, and in the end I was able to continue to work for them."  -KS

FOLLOW US
Facebook Twitter Linkedin RSS Feed JD Supra