On January 7, the US Supreme Court declined to review United States ex rel. Campie v. Gilead Sciences, Inc., 862 F.3d 890 (9th Cir. 2017), leaving in place a plaintiff-friendly decision by the Ninth Circuit regarding the False Claims Act’s materiality requirement.
On January 7, 2019, the US Supreme Court denied certiorari in United States ex rel. Harman v. Trinity Industries, Inc., 872 F.3d 645 (5th Cir. 2017), a closely watched case regarding the False Claims Act’s materiality standard.
Arent Fox attorneys D. Jacques Smith, Randall Brater, and Michael Dearington spoke with Bloomberg Law about an upcoming US Supreme Court case and its potential ramifications for False Claims Act cases.
The Department of Justice recently published its annual False Claims Act (FCA) recoveries statistics for Fiscal Year 2018, reporting nearly $2.9 billion in FCA settlements and judgments in FY 2018.
The Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services recently published its Semiannual Report to Congress, for the period April 1 to September 30, 2018.
At an FCPA conference on November 29, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced revisions to DOJ’s policy regarding pursuit of individuals involved in corporate wrongdoing. The current policy, memorialized in the 2015 “Yates Memo,” instructed that, “[t]o be eligible for any cooperation credit
A federal district court in the Southern District of New York dismissed claims filed against a CEO in his individual capacity under the False Claims Act’s anti-retaliation provision, and also rejected an alter-ego theory of liability.
Earlier this week, in Potts v. Center for Excellence in Higher Education, the Tenth Circuit held “that the False Claims Act’s anti-retaliation provision unambiguously excludes relief for retaliatory acts occurring after the employee has left employment.” 2018 WL 5796963, — F.3d — (10th Cir. Nov. 6,
Arent Fox is pleased to announce the launch of the Investigations Blog, a dedicated resource for legal updates and analysis on key enforcement news for companies and executives in highly regulated industries.
In a recent decision, the Sixth Circuit adopted an objective intent standard: an employee alleging constructive discharge in violation of the False Claims Act need not prove that the employer took actions designed to force the employee to quit.
Arent Fox Partners D. Jacques Smith and Randall A. Brater and Associate Michael F. Dearington penned an article in the May issue of Pratt’s Government Contracting Law Report on three recent changes to the Department of Justice’s enforcement policies.
A development out of the Ninth Circuit makes relators more likely to qualify as an original source under the False Claims Act and thus survive the public disclosure bar.
