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 22, 2016

In Carlson v. DynCorp, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit addressed 2009 and 2010 amendments to the False Claims Act (“FCA”) that broadened the scope of its anti-retaliation protection for whistleblowing employees.  As discussed more fully below, according to the Fourth Circuit, a whistleblowing employee can sue if his or her employer retaliates against him or her for making efforts to stop FCA violations, even if an FCA action against the employer was not a distinct possibility.

. . . . . .

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: July 23, 2015

In a matter of first impression, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a relator cannot partake of proceeds from an FCA action if he has been convicted of criminal conduct arising from his role in the fraud.  A CH2M Hill employee, Carl Schroeder, participated in fraudulent over-billing practices along with many of his colleagues. Schroeder pled guilty to one felony count of conspiracy to commit fraud.  After initial interviews by the U.S.

. . . . . .

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. 

. . . . . .