X

Reset Password

Username:

Change Password

Old Password:
New Password:
We have completed your request.

False Claims Act Statistics, News & Analysis

  • 06
  • October
  • 2016

Author:

Share on:

Out With the Old, in With the New: Resetting the Clock on the FCA Stats Tracker for DOJ FY 2017

Since LLB launched only a few short months ago, we really had little time to track stats for DOJ FY 2016, which came to a close on September 30, 2016. That means that we now have to reset the “clock” on our stat tracker—the FCA Stats at a Glance—to make sure that new recoveries from October onward are attributed to DOJ FY 2017. Before we do that, here is a quick recap of DOJ FY 2016.

Read More
  • 05
  • October
  • 2016

Author:

Share on:

Court Finds Falsity and Materiality Post-Escobar; Defendant Seeks Immediate Appeal

Three months have passed since the Supreme Court decided the landmark Escobar case, and courts across the country are beginning to parse the opinion. On September 20, 2016, a U.S. District Court Judge in the Northern District of California denied a defendant’s motion to reconsider denial of its motion for summary judgment in what may be the most pro-government FCA decision after Escobar. We summarize the decision below, but a more in-depth analysis can be found here.

Read More

False Claims Act Cert. Monitor: Solicitor General Asked to Weigh in on Public Disclosure Bar Petition, and New Petition Filed on FERA Retroactivity

Straight out of the gates from the long conference, the Supreme Court yesterday, October 3rd, called for the views of the Solicitor General (CVSG) on a relator’s cert. petition about the FCA public disclosure bar in U.S. ex rel. Advocates for Basic Legal Equality, Inc. v. U.S. Bank, N.A. (“ABLE”), No. 16-130, a case which we have written about previously. The petition asks whether a public disclosure of a broad, general category of alleged misconduct bars an FCA claim about a narrower, specific subtype of that misconduct, even though that subtype was not specifically addressed in the public disclosure. Also, a new petition has been filed on the question of the retroactive application of the 2009 FCA amendments. Kmart Corp. v. U.S. ex rel. Garbe, No. 16-408.

Read More

War Dogs Brings the False Claims Act to the Silver Screen, Offers Lessons to Government Contractors

While we here at LLB toiled away at our FCA mapFCA statistics, and FCA case law analysis in preparation for our August launch, we did poke our heads out of our cave long enough to notice that the FCA had just hit the big screen! No, we are not talking about the highly acclaimed FCA video that now appears on LLB. In August, mere weeks before we launched, the movie War Dogs hit theatres across the U.S., recounting the (highly-)dramatized but true tale of two twenty-somethings who cashed in on enormous profits by contracting to support military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Operating as AEY, Inc., the unlikely duo, working from their Miami apartment, won a $300 million ammunitions contract for the U.S. Army, and—allegedly—violated the FCA along the way.

Read More
  • 27
  • September
  • 2016

Share on:

Pressing the Limits of Rule 9(b): Seventh Circuit Revives Billing Code Claim, But Holds Other Claims Fail Rule 9(b) for Lack of "Context"

In yet another post-Escobar case involving the application of Rule 9(b), the Seventh Circuit reaffirmed the critical role of that rule in weeding out thinly-supported qui tam claims. In United States ex rel. Presser v Acacia Mental Health Clinic, LLC, No. 14-2804, 2016 WL 4555648 (7th Cir. Sept. 1, 2016), the relator, a nurse practitioner, brought FCA claims against her employer, a mental health clinic, alleging that the clinic provided, and billed for, medically unnecessary services and required nurse practitioners and receptionists to use a billing code reserved exclusively for psychological assessments and medical evaluations performed by therapists or psychiatrists.

Read More

False Claims Act Cert. Monitor: Supreme Court Will Consider Four FCA Petitions Today

Today, at the Supreme Court’s 2016long conference,” the justices will consider some 1,600 petitions for certiorari in a single day. There are four FCA cert. petitions up for review. We covered those petitions in an earlier FCA Cert. Monitor post. In short, two of the petitions raise questions related to the public disclosure bar, U.S. ex rel. Cause of Action v. Chicago Transit Authority, No. 16-131; U.S. ex rel. Advocates for Basic Equality, Inc. v. U.S. Bank, N.A., No. 16-130. The remaining two petitions concern the application of Rule 9(b), U.S. ex rel. Walterspiel v. Bayer AG, No. 16-8, and what preclusive effect, if any, a prior determination that the government is not entitled to restitution has on the government’s right to seek damages in an FCA case, Anghaie v. United States, No. 15-1456. We are watching these cases closely and will report on the Court’s decisions.

Read More

Filter By

Sign Up for Updates

Receive email news and alerts about False Claims Act/Qui Tam Litigation from V&E

Dates

Top Posts

Follow Us On Linkedin