Photo of Jason Crawford

When facing government investigations or high stakes litigation, clients trust Jason Crawford to evaluate allegations, identify risks, and formulate strategies to achieve the appropriate resolution. Jason advises and advocates for government contractors and companies from regulated industries in matters involving civil, criminal, and administrative enforcement, with a particular focus on the False Claims Act (FCA).

As a litigator, Jason has defended government contractors, drug manufacturers, grant recipients, health care companies, importers, and construction companies sued under the FCA by whistleblowers and the Department of Justice (DOJ) in federal courts throughout the country. He also helps clients conduct complex internal investigations and respond strategically to Office of Inspectors General inquiries, grand jury investigations, search warrants, and civil investigative demands.

Jason previously served as a DOJ Trial Attorney in the Civil Division, Fraud Section where he investigated and litigated FCA cases involving government contractors, importers, and health care companies. He also previously worked with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia where he prosecuted federal criminal cases.

A recognized thought leader on FCA developments, Jason has written and presented extensively on the fraud statute, and he is a co-host of the Let’s Talk FCA podcast.

In this episode, hosts Jason Crawford, Agustin Orozco, and Yuan Zhou discuss the evolving disclosure landscape and the various risks and rewards that contractors must weigh when deciding what to disclose, when to disclose, and where to direct the disclosure. 

“Let’s Talk FCA” is Crowell & Moring’s podcast covering the latest developments with the False

Last month marked the 16-year anniversary of the FAR Mandatory Disclosure Rule (MDR) going into effect, which created requirements for federal contractors to disclose violations of specific categories of federal criminal law and violations of the civil False Claims Act (FCA).  But the passage of time has not simplified the analysis that government contractors must undertake when they learn of allegations about conduct that could be disclosable to the government.  Rather, legal developments and new Department of Justice (DOJ) policies have created additional considerations for federal contractors as they navigate a complex disclosure landscape.Continue Reading The Evolving Landscape of Disclosure Considerations for Government Contractors

On December 18, 2024, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Texas announced a $680,000 False Claims Act (FCA) settlement with Lafayette RE Management LLC (Lafayette) in connection with the real estate investment firm’s receipt of a Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan at the height of the pandemic.  Crowell has previously reported on DOJ’s steady pursuit of PPP cases which have resulted in FCA settlements based on issues such as affiliation (discussed here) and ineligibility under the program’s rules (discussed here), but the Lafayette settlement is the first time that the government has intervened in a case based on the economic necessity certification that all PPP borrowers had to make on the initial loan application.  Continue Reading DOJ Settles PPP Case Based on Economic Necessity Certification

Constitutionality of the Qui Tam Provisions

In this episode, Jason Crawford, Agustin Orozco, and Will Tucker discuss U.S. ex. rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates LLC, the recent decision in which a court found the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act to be unconstitutional. The hosts analyze the court’s reasoning and consider

Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle of the District Court for the Middle District of Florida recently declared the False Claims Act qui tam provisions unconstitutional in U.S. ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, — F.Supp.3d –, 2024 WL 4349242 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 30, 2024), turning up the heat on a simmering constitutional fight

In a novel False Claims Act (FCA) ruling, on September 30, 2024, Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle of the District Court for the Middle District of Florida upended decades of FCA jurisprudence in declaring the qui tam provisions of the FCA unconstitutional in U.S. ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, 2024 WL 4349242 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 30, 2024). This decision follows Justice Thomas’ dissent in the recent Supreme Court decision, U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., 599 U.S. 419 (2023), where he posited, “[t]here are substantial arguments that the qui tam device is inconsistent with Article II and that private relators may not represent the interests of the United States in litigation.” While Justice Thomas’ implicit constitutional challenge was not entirely new to FCA practitioners, including it in his Polansky dissent, with Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett in a concurring opinion noting their agreement that the Court should consider the constitutional questions in an appropriate case, swung wide open a door of opportunity for defendants and their counsel to attempt to dismiss FCA qui tam suits on constitutional grounds. Judge Mizelle’s decision in Zafirov is the first of its kind to actually dismiss a qui tam suit on constitutional grounds, and will likely lead to an avalanche of similar motions in nearly every non-intervened lawsuit brought by a relator.Continue Reading In the Upside Down: District Court Upends Decades of False Claims Act Precedent in Declaring Qui Tam Provisions Unconstitutional

On August 8, 2024, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California announced a $6.3 million False Claims Act settlement with West Coast Dental Administrative Services LLC (formerly West Coast Dental Services Inc.) and its founders and former owners due to seven improper second-draw Paycheck Protection Program loans received by West Coast Dental and affiliated dental offices. Continue Reading California Dental Offices Settle FCA Allegations Regarding Second-Draw PPP Loans for $6.3M

On August 5, 2024, in United States ex rel. Relator LLC v. Howard D. Kootstra and Golden Empire Mortgage, Inc., Case No. 1:22-cv-00924-TLN-CDB (E.D. Cal.), the District Court for the Eastern District of California granted a motion to dismiss allegations that a mortgage lender made false or fraudulent statements on its Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) application in violation of the False Claims Act where the relator could not overcome the FCA’s public disclosure bar.Continue Reading FCA Complaint Based on PPP Information Pulled from PandemicOversight.gov Website Barred

Criminal Investigations and the False Claims Act

In this episode, Steve Byers, Jason Crawford, and Agustin Orozco discuss the intersection between False Claims Act investigations and parallel criminal proceedings. “Let’s Talk FCA” is Crowell & Moring’s podcast covering the latest developments with the False Claims Act.

ListenCrowell.com | PodBean | SoundCloud | Apple

Cost Accounting and the False Claims Act

In this episode, Jason Crawford, Agustin Orozco, and Erin Rankin look back at one of the more noteworthy settlements of 2023—the $377M settlement by Booz Allen Hamilton to resolve allegations arising out of the company’s purported non-compliance with Cost Accounting Standards. “Let’s Talk FCA” is Crowell & Moring’s