US v STOUFFLET | TIMELINE 2001-2003

PRE-INDICTMENT
1. ESCRIPTS MD, LLC., 2001 GEORGIA CORPORATION
(CONTROL # K931124)

2. CHRIS STOUFFLET founded the business and in 2001 issued 24½%

ownership each to longtime friends, Troy Sobert and Erin Riggins. Stoufflet
maintained 51% controlling interest of the business.

3. LAW FIRM OF KILPATRICK STOCKTON, LLP

Structured the business as a “Management Service Organization” (MSO).
The business contracted with U.S. licensed doctors who reviewed request
for prescriptions. Approved prescriptions were forward to numerous U.S.
licensed pharmacies, which fulfilled the prescriptions, dispensed, and
shipped the medications to the consumers.

4. ESCRIPTS CONDUIT BETWEEN U.S. CONSUMERS, U.S. DOCTORS

AND U.S. PHARMACIES
eScripts was not involved in the “medical decision making process” nor did
eScripts possess, dispense or distribute any “controlled substances”

5. ESCRIPTS OFFERED ACCESS TO REQUEST PRESCRIPTIONS FOR LIFESTYLE

ENHANCEMENT/ EMBARRASSMENT MEDICATIONS
U.S. consumers could request prescriptions for select "lifestyle
enhancement" or "embarrassment medications" (i.e.: Viagra: erectile
dysfunction, Valtrex: herpes, Phentermine, weight loss). Prescriptions for
“controlled substances” offered were for weight-loss only. (no narcotics, or
sleep aids were offered)

6. NO FEDERAL LAWS GOVERNING PRESCRIPTIONS VIA THE INTERNET

With the internet being in its infancy stage, there was no regulation
regarding prescribing and dispensing of prescription medications via the
internet.

7. SEYFARTH SHAW, LLP, KILPATRICK STOCKTON, LLP, AND ARENT FOX, LLC,
Stoufflet engages prominent law firms to advise him. Lawyers provided the
legal infrastructure including the legal contracts utilized to facilitate
business. (see attached chart of attorneys involved in business operations)

Page 1 of 6
US v STOUFFLET | TIMELINE 2001-2003

8. JANUARY 2001: STOUFFLET REQUESTED THE FDA OFFICE OF CRIMINAL

INVESTIGATIONS inspection of the business from FDA “Special Agent” Paul
Southern. The FDA Office of Criminal Investigations conducted the
voluntary investigation, which resulted in “no wrongdoing.”

9. STOUFFLET UNDER DIRECTION FROM KILPATRICK STOCKTON ENGAGES

FORMER U.S. ASSISTANT ATTORNEY BUDDY PARKER AS A PREEMPTIVE
MEASURE TO REMAIN COMPLIANT

10. 2001: STOUFFLET RETAINS MEL HEWITT AS GENERAL COUNSEL

[APPROX FULL-TIME]

11. KILPATRICK STOCKTON PROVIDES UPDATES “COMPREHENSIVE PRACTICE

MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT”
Legal agreement between the business and medical doctors.

12. AUGUST 2001: FEDERAL SEARCH WARRANT

Executed at Stoufflets’ businesses based on three or four employees’
unauthorized use of prescriptions. Stoufflet engaged lawyers from
Kilpatrick Stockton to investigate and advise accordingly.

13. FEDERAL JUDGE AND U.S. ATTORNEY’S OFFICE ALLOW STOUFFLET TO

CONTINUE CONDUCTING BUSINESS
AUSA StrIpolli agreed with Federal Judge Clayton Scofield to return business
equipment taken during execution of a search warrant so Stoufflet could
continue conducting business. [R-41 hearing transcript]

14. SEPTEMBER 29, 2001: JOINT DEFENSE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY

STOUFFLET, SOBERT, RIGGINS, PARKER, GILLEN, AND FROELICH
Contains unique provisions regarding the legality of the business.

15. JANUARY 15, 2002: HEWITT INITIAL MEETING WITH KILPATRICK

STOCKTON

Page 2 of 6
US v STOUFFLET | TIMELINE 2001-2003

16. JANUARY 2002: STOUFFLET AND HEWITT MEET WITH LAWYERS FROM
ARENT FOX IN WASHINGTON, DC [PROMINENT HEALTHCARE LAW FIRM]
AND THEY AGREE TO PROVIDE LEGAL SERVICES TO ESCRIPTS
50 State Medical Board survey, redrafting of all legal agreements, website
audit and recommendations. Kilpatrick Stockton steadfast position was the
business was “not illegal” but could not guarantee an overzealous
prosecutor would not bring a case.

17. JANUARY 15, 2002: HEWITT MEET WITH KILPATRICK STOCKTON

18. MARCH 11, 2002: STOUFFLET REQUEST KILPATRICK BECOME

MORE PRO-ACTIVE IN THE BUSINESS

19. APRIL 02, 2002: HEWITT HIRES ATTORNEY DARREN TRAUB TO SERVE AS
FULL-TIME GENERAL COUNSEL

20. APRIL 18, 2002: HEWITT APRIL 24, 2002: INTERNAL LEGAL MEMO REVEALS
ARENT FOX DISCUSSIONS REGARDING ESCRIPTS CONTINUING BUSINESS 1

21. APRIL 24, 2002: INTERNAL LEGAL MEMO REVEALS ARENT FOX DEVISED
“HIGH-MEDIUM-LOW RISK” STRATEGY FOR MEDICAL BOARD SURVEYS

22. APRIL 25, 2002: ARENT FOX REVISES “INFORMED CONSENT” AND
“PATIENT RESPONSIBILITY AGREEMENTS” UTILIZED IN EVERY
TRANSACTION

23. MAY 22, 2002: PARKER INSTRUCTS ARENT FOX TO RUN MATTERS
THOUGH HIM FOR FINAL APPROVAL 2

1
“provide your thoughts as to the level of risk the company faces and whether you believe the company should be
taking action other than waiting?”
2
“I told them I had no problem with them assisting you in future endeavors; however, I warned them not to contact
the US Attorney's Office without clearing matters with me.”

Page 3 of 6
US v STOUFFLET | TIMELINE 2001-2003

24. JUNE 5, 2002: ARENT FOX INFORMS HEWITT, TRAUB, AND PARKER OF
OPERATIONAL CHANGES AND POTENTIAL RISK DUE TO THE “EVOLVING
NATURE OF THE LAW”

25. JUNE 20, 2002: ARENT FOX ADVISED STOPPING BUSINESS IN NEVADA 3

26. JUNE 13, 2002: $1.5 MILLION PRE-PAID LEGAL FEE’S

Paid to the law firm of Gillen, Parker, Withers, LLC. for expert legal services
and if needed defense counsel
[Buddy Parker, Craig Gillen, and Jerome Froelich]

27. AUGUST 6, 2002: ARENT FOX DISCUSSES SCHEDULING A CONFERENCE

CALL TO DISCUSS LATEST STATE SURVEYS

28. AUGUST 8, 2002: INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL INVESTIGATION PERFORMED

FINDS NO WRONGDOING - former IRS agent Ted Robertson performs
lengthy audit and investigation in the business. There is no evidence of any
attempt to hide or conceal funds at anytime.

29. AUGUST 23, 2002, SEYFARTH SHAW, PARKER, GILLEN, FROELICH AND
TRAUB ISSUE STATEMENT FOR NEWS STORY
Prepared statement for news story on Stoufflets’ business, eScripts.
General counsel Traub in a prepared statement and on camera interview
stated the business was in compliance with all laws. 4

30. SEPTEMBER 3, 2002: KILPATRICK STOCKTON ASKS CRIMINAL ATTORNEYS

PARKER, GILLEN AND FROELICH TO ACCESS BUSINESS RISK

3
“we would classify Nevada as a very high risk state and would strong recommend e-Scripts discontinue its
business in Nevada or with Residents of Nevada until the business model is altered to meet the requisites of this
law.”
4
LETTER FROM TRAUB TO PARKER, GILLEN AND FROELICH stated: “I can tell her that all of my clients, including e-
Scripts, who participate in this industry utilize only U.S. licensed physicians and pharmacies and comply with all
state and federal laws”.

Page 4 of 6
US v STOUFFLET | TIMELINE 2001-2003

31. SEPTEMBER 9, 2002, KILPATRICK STOCKTON

Informs Stoufflet that they feel confident “nothing will come of the criminal
investigation.”

32. APRIL 19, 2003: LANDMARK DECISION: VICTORY FOR INTERNET MEDICINE
Judge issues FINAL ORDER in Florida ruling online prescriptions legal.
5
33. OCTOBER 20, 2003: LAWYERS AFFIRM ESCRIPTS COMPLIANCE

34. DECEMBER 17, 2003: GENERAL COUNSEL TRAUB PROVIDES STOUFFLET AN

OVERVIEW OF AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR
List includes reassurances of compliance with all State and Federal Laws.

35. NOVEMBER 6, 2003, LAWYERS ADVISED STOUFFLET TO DISCONTINUE

OFFERING CUSTOMERS ACCESS TO CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
The DEA announced it would step up enforcement actions to regulate the
diversion “controlled substances” via the internet. Stoufflet is advised by
his lawyers to discontinue offering access to “controlled substances” to
avoid any unnecessary harassment by the DEA. Stoufflet complied.
The lawyers provided the following statement for the eScripts website:
“DUE TO THE RECENT POLICIES ADOPTED BY THE U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency
“http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/pressrel/diversion_actualities_transcript.html
“eSCRIPTS MD LLC. WILL NO LONGER accept requests for consultations related to
"CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES."

5
Parker and Traub provide Stoufflet approved text: “we felt the need to reiterate e-Scripts.MD's continued
commitment to lawful and ethical business practices, which makes us the established leading company since 1999.
As an affiliate of e-Scripts-MD, you can rest assure that we will continue to remain in compliance and keep up with
the ever changing regulations. We are constantly working with our outstanding team of legal experts to ensure and
protect our position in the industry and, most important, our plans for the future.”

Page 5 of 6
US v STOUFFLET | TIMELINE 2001-2003

36. NOVEMBER 17, 2003, ATTORNEY PARKER REAFFIRMS THE

BUSINESS “NOT ILLEGAL”
“You cannot state “….still derive profits from this type of illegal
activity.”The activity has not, I repeat not been found to be “illegal”
per se.”

37. DECEMBER 12, 2003, LAWYERS ADVISE STOUFFLET TO DISCONTINUE

BUSINESS
Due to many unscrupulous businesses and the new enforcement actions by
the DEA regulating the industry, Stoufflet lawyers advised him to cease
business operations.
Stoufflet complied.
The lawyers provided the following statement for the eScripts website.
“Due to the recent position taken by the Federal Government as it
pertains to the issuances of prescriptions based solely on an online
questionnaire, effective December 12, 2003, eScripts MD LLC will no
longer accept request for prescriptions by submissions of online
questionnaires. eScripts MD LLC takes the position of the government
serious and we apologize for lack of notice”.

DEA ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS WERE BASED ON “POLICY” NOT “LAW”

This policy provided “guidance” for doctors and pharmacies utilizing the
internet when issuing “controlled substances.”

38. STOUFFLET REFUSED LUCRATIVE OFFERS TO SELL THE BUSINESS

Page 6 of 6