Earlier Complaint Fails 9(b), But Bars FCA Suit
Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.08.11
Addressing a question of first impression for it, the D.C. Circuit in U.S. ex rel Batiste v. SLM Corp. held that the FCA’s “first-to-file” rule deprives the district courts of subject matter jurisdiction when a complaint filed earlier alleges “the same material elements of a fraudulent scheme,” even if the earlier complaint did not meet the heightened standard of Rule 9(b). In so holding, the D.C. Circuit disagreed with the Sixth Circuit in Walburn v. Lockheed Martin Corp., noting that nothing in the FCA incorporates Rule 9(b)’s particularity requirement into the first-to-file rule and that the earlier complaint was sufficient to allow the government to investigate the fraudulent scheme.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.23.24
The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Luv n’ Care v. Laurain provides a cautionary tale for patentees. Disclosing prior art to the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is not enough to insulate against a finding of inequitable conduct, particularly where a patentee mischaracterizes that prior art and the PTO’s patentability determination may have differed had the patentee accurately described the prior art. Misconduct by the patentee during litigation can also lead to a finding of unclean hands that bars the patentee from relief for alleged infringement against the opposing party in that litigation.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 04.23.24
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.22.24
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.18.24
GSA Clarifies Permissibility of Upfront Payments for Software-as-a-Service Offerings
