Effective August 1, the penalty range for violations under the civil False Claims Act nearly doubled, pursuant to a Department of Justice interim final rule published on June 30th. In a “Feature Comment” published in The Government Contractor, C&M attorneys analyze how the dramatic increase in FCA penalties impacts the landscape of litigation. The article… Continue Reading
In a decision that will impact Government contractors, health care providers and all institutions that accept federal dollars, the U.S. Supreme Court this past week offered a qualified affirmation of the validity of the implied certification theory of False Claims Act liability. In Universal Health Servs. v. U.S. ex rel. Escobar, the Court unanimously held… Continue Reading
For the third consecutive term, the Supreme Court will hear a case involving the False Claims Act (FCA). On May 31, the Court granted review in State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. U.S. ex rel. Rigsby to address the applicable standard for dismissal in FCA cases when whistleblowers (referred to as relators under the… Continue Reading
In February, the Sixth Circuit in U.S. ex rel. Wall v. Circle C Construction rejected the government’s FCA damages theory that it is entitled to three times the amount of the total contract value, regardless of any value received, because the claim for payment was “tainted” by the underlying legal violation. In a “Feature Comment”… Continue Reading
On April 19, 2016, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in U.S. v. Universal Health Servs., Inc., which concerns (1) whether the implied certification theory of legal falsity under the FCA is ever viable; and (2) if it is, whether a contractor’s reimbursement claim can be legally false under that theory if the contractor fails… Continue Reading
“False Claims Act cases have been particularly hot in 2015”—so reads the opening line of an opinion in a FCA decision from the past year. This is an apt description for a year that saw total FCA recoveries exceed $3 billion, a sign that the FCA will continue to be the source of government and… Continue Reading
Last week, in a case that will have a significant impact on the government contracting industry, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, a False Claims Act (FCA) case from the First Circuit. By agreeing to hear the case, the Court appears set to resolve a… Continue Reading
A prominent FCA practitioner observed twenty years ago that while FCA settlements were common, it was impossible to find a standard settlement agreement, if there was such a thing, or a DOJ policy on point.¹ His words ring true today. While the FCA has become the Government’s principal anti-fraud weapon, little has been written about the… Continue Reading
The government has reiterated in no uncertain terms its proposed standard for particularity under the FCA: “a qui tam complaint satisfie[s] Rule 9(b) if it contains detailed allegations supporting a plausible inference that false claims were submitted to the government, even if the complaint does not identify specific requests for payment.” Brief for United States… Continue Reading
Just last week, the Department of Justice announced another large False Claims Act settlement with a GSA Schedule contractor – for $60.9 million. A review of the underlying qui tam complaint, filed by a former vice president of the contractor, reveals multiple alleged failures by Tremco Inc. and RPM International to comply with the basic… Continue Reading
In March, we published an article entitled “New Questions Regarding The Jurisdictionality Of The FCA’s Public Disclosure Bar: Potential Hurdles And Increased Costs In Defending Against Parasitic Qui Tam Actions,” The Government Contractor, Vol. 55, No. 12 (Mar. 27, 2013). We explored whether, given the 2010 amendments to the civil False Claims Act (FCA) under… Continue Reading
Complaints alleging violations of the False Claims Act (“FCA”) must satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b), which requires the government or qui tam relator to “state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud.” In order to ferret out fishing expeditions, many courts have held that Rule 9(b) requires plaintiffs to allege the who, what, when,… Continue Reading
In a series of posts (Part 1), I’m examining the Department of Justice’s annual Summary of False Claims Act cases and recoveries to see what these statistics might reveal about FCA enforcement trends. In the first post, we looked at the rising number of new FCA matters that were filed last year. But who gets… Continue Reading
The start of a new year is a perfect opportunity for government contractors to refocus and rejuvenate their compliance efforts. Regardless of whether a company is contractually required to have a compliance program, contractors should take time to determine the contractual obligations and risks they face now and in the year ahead. Is your company… Continue Reading
On Thursday, June 14 at 1 p.m. (Eastern time), Crowell & Moring government contracts and false claims act attorneys Bob Rhoad and Dalal Hasan will be conducting a webinar entitled “False Claims Act: Key Provisions and Current Trends in Compliance and Enforcement” on behalf of L2 Federal Resources. During this 90-minute webinar, Bob and Dalal will provide… Continue Reading
Two years ago, GSA reached a $128 million settlement with Network Appliance, now known as NetApp Inc., based on a whistleblower False Claims Act (“FCA”) suit that alleged the company had failed to comply with the Price Reduction Clause of the contract. The settlement amount was, and continues to be, the largest Schedule contract fraud settlement… Continue Reading
Professional whistleblower Brady Folliard’s most recent False Claims Act suit against technology vendors alleging violations of the Trade Agreements Act (“TAA”) has survived a motion to dismiss with respect to two defendants (GovPlace and Government Acquisitions, Inc.), but otherwise has been dismissed for the other six defendants (which include Hewlett Packard and GTSI Corporation). In… Continue Reading
Home Depot was sued in 2008 by two whistleblowers claiming that the company had violated the False Claims Act by selling products that did not comply with the Trade Agreements Act (“TAA”) to the U.S. government through its GSA Schedule contract. The United States has not intervened in the case. Home Depot recently moved for reconsideration of… Continue Reading
Verizon Communications, Inc. recently paid the U.S. government $93.5 million to resolve False Claims Act allegations that it overcharged the government on voice and data telecommunications services contracts. In addition to the significance of the amount paid, the case is notable for both the government’s aggressive enforcement of FAR provisions and the fact the alleged… Continue Reading
The United States has intervened in yet another False Claims Act suit against GSA Schedule contractors alleging violations of the Trade Agreements Act. On November 24, 2010, the United States filed its Complaint in Intervention in U.S. ex rel. Navarro v. Divine Imaging, Inc. et al. The complaint alleges that four different office supply companies… Continue Reading
As discussed in my blog post in June, the Department of Justice intervened in a False Claims Act case filed by a whistleblower against Oracle which alleged that the company had failed to accurately disclose its commercial pricing practices to the government in association with its GSA Schedule contract. DOJ has now filed its complaint (.pdf)… Continue Reading
On June 16, 2010, the media reported that a False Claims Act case had been filed by a whistleblower against Oracle Corporation alleging that the company had failed to disclose deep discounts given to the most favored commercial customers. The Department of Justice has intervened and unsealed the relator’s complaint. The Government has not yet filed its complaint… Continue Reading
On May 25, 2010, the Justice Department announced an $87.5 million settlement with EMC for alleged false claims associated with EMC’s GSA Schedule contract. The settlement comes out of a series of qui tam suits filed against IT companies and systems integration consultants by relators Norman Rille and Neal Roberts in the Eastern District of Arkansas… Continue Reading
