Published: July 17, 2018

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in a case concerning the “first-to-file” bar under the False Claims Act.

. . . . . .

Published: November 17, 2017

​In United States v. Luce, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that a plaintiff suing under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq., must demonstrate not merely that the government suffered a loss that it would not otherwise have suffered without the false claims (i.e., “but for” causation), but also that the government’s loss was the reasonably foreseeable result of the false claims (i.e., “proximate causation”).

. . . . . .

Published: September 28, 2015

In United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co. et al., a qui tam suit we previously covered here, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals once again ruled that defense contractor KBR Inc.’s internal investigation documents were privileged, rejecting for the second time the District Court ’s decision to the contrary.

. . . . . .

Published: June 12, 2015

This month, a federal jury found former defense contractor Armet Armored Vehicles, Inc. not liable in a False Claims Act (“FCA”) lawsuit that alleged the company overcharged the federal government for armored vehicles by shipping defective vehicles and failing to deliver all the vehicles ordered. 

. . . . . .

Published: May 26, 2015

The U.S. Supreme Court today issued its ruling in Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., et al. v. United States ex. rel. Carter, a case we reported on previously (/blogs/whistleblower-wire/4528). The Court was asked to decide 1) whether the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (“WSLA”), 18 U.S.C. § 3287, applies to FCA claims to toll the statute of limitations when the U.S. is at war; and 2) whether the FCA’s first-to-file bar, found at 31 U.S.C.

. . . . . .

Published: April 3, 2015

The Securities and Exchange Commission this week announced its first victory in a case where it accused a defendant of stifling potential whistleblowers. Houston-based contractor KBR, Inc. was alleged to have used confidentiality agreements that could have prevented current or former employees from reporting securities violations to the commission without first getting approval from KBR's legal department.

. . . . . .