Defective Pricing & the False Claims Act
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.21.19
The enactments of the False Claim Act (FCA) and the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA) were separated by nearly 100 years, yet the two statutes have become kissing cousins, with many defective pricing cases turning into fraud actions. In Defective Pricing & the False Claims Act, published in the April 2019 issue of Thomson Reuters’s Briefing Papers, Crowell & Moring attorneys discuss: (1) the historical factors and practical warning signs linking defective pricing and FCA actions; (2) the burdens and elements of proof in TINA and FCA litigations and how certain elements may overlap and even bolster defenses to both defective pricing and fraud actions; and (3) the procedural elements of TINA and FCA actions—such as stays of proceedings, evidentiary standards, and statutes of limitation—and where these factors may determine the outcomes in both defective pricing and fraud proceedings.
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
