Skip to Main Content

David A. Bocian


D   484.270.1418
F   610-667-7056

David Bocian, a former federal prosecutor, leads KTMC’s Whistleblower and False Claims Act Litigation group.  David’s practice is dedicated to representing whistleblowers in cases brought under federal and state qui tam statutes, and through financial fraud whistleblower programs, such as the SEC, CFTC and IRS.  He has had the privilege of representing many types of whistleblowers, including health care professionals, financial analysts, physicians, sales and marketing employees, attorneys and compliance professionals.  David additionally litigates complex securities fraud matters as a member of KTMC’s Securities practice.

David has spent most of his legal career litigating fraud cases.  For more than a decade, David served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the District of New Jersey, where he was appointed Senior Litigation Counsel and managed the Trenton U.S. Attorney’s Office.  His work as a prosecutor included overseeing complex investigations involving government corruption and federal program fraud; commercial and public sector kickbacks; government contractor fraud; tax fraud; and, other white collar and financial crimes.  David tried numerous cases before federal juries and received awards for his work from the Department of Justice, as well as commendations from many law enforcement agencies, including the FBI and the IRS.

David has extensive experience in the health care and life sciences fields as well. He has the distinction of being one of the few whistleblower attorneys in the United States to have been employed in the health care industry, having been responsible for implementing a system-wide compliance program for a complex health system. David has also served as an adjunct professor of law at Rutgers Law School, where he has taught Health Care Fraud and Abuse and participated in numerous health law symposia.


  • American Association for Justice, past Co-Chair, Qui Tam Litigation Group
  • Association of the Federal Bar of New Jersey
  • American Health Lawyers Association
  • Taxpayers Against Fraud

Speaking Engagements

Panel on data analysis in whistleblower litigation, American Conference Institute’s Sunshine Act, Open Payments, and Aggregate Spend Compliance Conference, New York, October 20-22, 2014


  • Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyer, 2019-2022
  • United States Department of Justice, Director’s Award for Superior Performance by an Assistant U.S. Attorney

Current Cases

  • CASE CAPTION     In re Mylan N.V. Securities Litigation
    COURT United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
    CASE NUMBER 2:20-cv-00955-NR
    JUDGE Honorable J. Nicholas Ranjan
    PLAINTIFF Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi (“MPERS”)
    DEFENDANTS Mylan N.V. (“Mylan” or the “Company”), Heather Bresch, Rajiv Malik, Anthony Mauro, and Kenneth Parks
    CLASS PERIOD February 16, 2016 through May 7, 2019, inclusive

    This securities fraud class action stems from Defendants’ promotion of Mylan’s unique ability to manufacture quality drugs across a broad product line while concealing that the Company was experiencing widespread product quality issues at its manufacturing facilities, including at its flagship manufacturing plant in Morgantown, West Virginia.

    Mylan is one of the largest drug manufacturers in the world, selling several thousand different drug products.  During the Class Period, Mylan developed and manufactured many of these products at its Morgantown plant.  The Morgantown plant, as with all drug manufacturing facilities, received inspections by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”)  to ensure that its quality and safety testing was complete, consistent, accurate, and free from manipulation.  Mylan publicly acknowledged that complying with FDA regulations was critical to its business and profitability. 

    Yet, despite this acknowledgement, Mylan encountered significant regulatory issues at its manufacturing plants. These issues were largely unknown to the investing public.  In 2016, a surprise FDA inspection of Morgantown substantiated a former Mylan employee’s account that, under the direct leadership of President Rajiv Malik, Mylan employees had been manipulating drug test results to achieve passing quality control results, and deliberately corrupting testing data.  Following this investigation, Malik attended meetings with the FDA where officials told him they were “stunned” by Mylan’s “egregious” violations.   Just two years later, the FDA conducted another surprise investigation into the Morgantown facility. This investigation culminated in the FDA detailing thirteen significant deficiencies in Mylan’s operations and found that, among other violations, Mylan’s attempts to remedy its previous deficiencies identified during the FDA’s 2016 inspection were “inadequate,” and that Mylan exhibited poor quality control oversight, major lapses in equipment cleaning, and ineffective controls. 

    MPERS filed a 137-page complaint in November 2020 on behalf of a putative class of investors alleging that Mylan and its former executives violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act.  As alleged, during the Class Period,  Mylan’s CEO Heather Bresch and President Malik stressed Mylan’s ability to produce a significant volume of drugs across product lines while “meeting or exceeding” “stringent” quality standards and that this ability differentiated Mylan from competitors. Unbeknownst to investors, however, its manufacturing facilities, including at its flagship Morgantown facility, were rife with systemic, egregious, and long-standing deficiencies.  As multiple whistleblowers, Mylan employees, and the FDA told Mylan during the Class Period, the company’s quality failures were a by-product of management’s exclusive focus on production volume so as to increase Mylan’s bottom line.  These failures exposed Mylan to serious regulatory penalties, costly production disruptions, and expensive remediation. 

    At the end of the Class Period, Mylan finally admitted that its focus on generating massive volumes of drugs was unsustainable, and it had to halt production at Morgantown and dramatically reduce Mylan’s generics portfolio going forward. When the relevant truth was finally revealed to investors, Mylan’s stock price declined precipitously, materially damaging investors.      

    Defendants’ motion to dismiss is pending.

    Read Consolidated Class Action Complaint Here

  • CASE CAPTION  Washtenaw County Employees' Retirement System v Walgreen Co., et al.
    COURT United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
    CASE NUMBER 1:15-cv-03187
    JUDGE Honorable Sharon Johnson Coleman
    PLAINTIFF Industriens Pensionsforsikring A/S (“Industriens”)
    DEFENDANTS Walgreen Co. (“Walgreen” or the “Company”), Gregory D. Wasson, and Wade Miquelon
    CLASS PERIOD March 25, 2014 through August 5, 2014, inclusive

    This securities fraud class action case arises out of Defendants’ representations and omissions regarding Walgreen’s highly publicized earnings target of $9 billion to $9.5 billion for fiscal year 2016 (the “FY16 target”) and the negative impact of hyperinflation in generic drug prices (“generic inflation”) combined with unfavorable reimbursement contracts that caused significant reductions in Walgreen’s gross margins and earnings. During the Class Period, Defendants repeatedly reaffirmed the FY16 target and represented that Walgreen was seeing “nothing unusual” with respect to generic inflation or reimbursement pressure. Plaintiff alleges that unbeknownst to investors, the systemic shift to generic inflation caused a catastrophic impact on Walgreen’s earnings and profitability because it was “locked up” in multi-year contracts with lower reimbursement rates that did not protect against generic inflation.

    Industriens filed a 124-page complaint in August 2015 on behalf of a proposed class of investors alleging that Walgreen and its former executives, CEO Greg Wasson and CFO Wade Miquelon, violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act by making false and misleading statements and concealing material facts about the magnitude and severity of generic inflation and reimbursement pressure and the combined impact on Walgreens’ margins and profitability, including the FY16 target. As alleged, following Walgreens’ disclosure of a $2 billion shortfall to its FY16 EBIT target as a direct result of generic inflation and reimbursement pressure, Walgreens’s stock price fell precipitously, causing significant losses and damages to the Company’s investors.

    In September 2016, the Honorable Sharon Johnson Coleman issued an order denying in part Defendants’ motion to dismiss. In March 2018, Judge Coleman certified the case as a class action. Following Industriens’s amendment of the complaint in December 2018, Judge Coleman issued an order in September 2019 denying in part Defendants’ renewed motion to dismiss. The order held that Plaintiff’s amended complaint adequately alleged several additional false and misleading statements and omissions, including statements regarding the FY16 target and the negative impact of generic inflation and reimbursement pressure on the Company’s performance.

    On November 2, 2021, the Court issued a Memorandum and Opinion and Order denying in large part Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, clearing the case to proceed to trial. 

    With trial approaching, the parties reached a $105 million cash settlement, which the Court preliminarily approved on June 29, 2022.

    Read First Amended Consolidated Complaint Here

    Read WCERS v. Walgreen Opinion and Order Granting Class Certification Here

    Read WCERS v. Walgreen Opinion and Order Granting Motion to Dismiss 

    Read WCERS v. Walgreen Opinion and Order Granting Motions for Summary Judgement Here

    Read WCERS v. Walgreen Order Granting Preliminary Approval