DAM Contractor's Underbidding Insufficient For FCA Liability
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.21.05
Affirming summary judgment, the D.C. Circuit in U.S. ex rel. Bettis v. Oderbrecht Contractors (Jan. 11, 2005) held that evidence that a dam contractor (1) underbid, (2) reaffirmed its underbid, and (3) claimed that it would use cost-saving measures it never employed did not permit the conclusion that the contractor fraudulently induced the Army Corps of Engineers to award it the contract. The Court acknowledged that claims submitted for payment under a contract that was fraudulently induced can give rise to civil False Claims Act liability, but found in this case that the contractor's underbid was not a promise that its estimated costs were accurate, only that it would perform the dam work at the unit prices it bid, such that submission of claims for payment under the contract, including claims for equitable adjustments above the contract price, were not false claims.
Insights
Client Alert | 8 min read | 06.30.25
AI Companies Prevail in Path-Breaking Decisions on Fair Use
Last week, artificial intelligence companies won two significant copyright infringement lawsuits brought by copyright holders, marking an important milestone in the development of the law around AI. These decisions – Bartz v. Anthropic and Kadrey v. Meta (decided on June 23 and 25, 2025, respectively), along with a February 2025 decision in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence – suggest that AI companies have plausible defenses to the intellectual property claims that have dogged them since generative AI technologies became widely available several years ago. Whether AI companies can, in all cases, successfully assert that their use of copyrighted content is “fair” will depend on their circumstances and further development of the law by the courts and Congress.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.30.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
FDA Targets Gene Editing Clinical Trials in China and other “Hostile Countries”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
