D.C. Circuit Loosens Public Disclosure Bar While Tightening the Reins on Damages
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.16.12
In United States ex rel. Davis v. District of Columbia (May 15, 2011), the D.C. Circuit held that recent Supreme Court precedent had abrogated the Circuit's long-standing rule that a relator must provide the government with the information upon which his allegations are based not only before filing an action, but also prior to any public disclosure. The Circuit Court also applied its recent holding in U.S. v. Science Applications Corp., 626 F.3d 1257, that proof of damages requires a showing that, as the result of the alleged fraud, the value of what the government received was less than what it believed it had purchased, finding that, in the matter before it, because there was no allegation that claimed reimbursements were for services not actually received or of inflated value -- only that they lacked documentary support -- "the government got what it paid for and there are no damages."
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
