1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Defendant’s Reasonable Interpretation of Ambiguous Regulation Negates FCA Liability

Defendant’s Reasonable Interpretation of Ambiguous Regulation Negates FCA Liability

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.01.15

The D.C. Circuit overturned a jury verdict against MWI Corp., represented by C&M, in a long-running civil FCA suit in which the government asserted claims for approximately $225 million in trebled damages (plus additional civil penalties), alleging that false claims and statements were submitted to the Export-Import Bank in connection with eight loans to Nigeria for the purchase of MWI's water pumps. The court held that there was no evidence that the government "had officially warned MWI away from its otherwise facially reasonable interpretation of [an] undefined and ambiguous [regulatory] term" and ruled that, in such a situation, the FCA's knowledge/scienter element cannot be established.


Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.23.26

Bipartisan Coalition of State AGs Backs Federal PBM Transparency Rule

In mid-April, a bipartisan coalition of 45 State Attorneys General (AG) submitted a formal letter to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) expressing their collective support for a proposed rule (Improving Transparency into Pharmacy Benefit Manager Fee Disclosure, or RIN 1210-AB37), which would — if enacted — impose new disclosure obligations on pharmacy benefit managers (PBM) regulated under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)....