CFC Denies Fraud Counterclaims for Lack of Scienter
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.08.13
In response to a contractor's CDA claim for the cancellation of two purchase orders for printed circuit cards when the contractor manufactured the parts itself rather than providing the parts from specified approved sources, the government in Ulysses, Inc. v. U.S. (Apr. 30, 2013), brought counterclaims for fraud under the False Claims Act, the fraud provision of the Contract Disputes Act, and the Forfeiture of Fraudulent Claims Act. The CFC denied them all, holding that the contractor did not act in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of its claims because neither the RFQ nor the contractor's quotation leading to the purchase order specified a particular source and, therefore, its erroneous interpretation of the purchase orders "was not so implausible as to be frivolous" and because it had advised the government that it believed it was an approved source, "making this a classic case for application of the Government knowledge defense."
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
