1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Earlier Complaint Fails 9(b), But Bars FCA Suit

Earlier Complaint Fails 9(b), But Bars FCA Suit

Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.08.11

Addressing a question of first impression for it, the D.C. Circuit in U.S. ex rel Batiste v. SLM Corp. held that the FCA’s “first-to-file” rule deprives the district courts of subject matter jurisdiction when a complaint filed earlier alleges “the same material elements of a fraudulent scheme,” even if the earlier complaint did not meet the heightened standard of Rule 9(b).  In so holding, the D.C. Circuit disagreed with the Sixth Circuit in Walburn v. Lockheed Martin Corp., noting that nothing in the FCA incorporates Rule 9(b)’s particularity requirement into the first-to-file rule and that the earlier complaint was sufficient to allow the government to investigate the fraudulent scheme.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25

A Sign of What’s to Come? Court Dismisses FCA Retaliation Complaint Based on Alleged Discriminatory Use of Federal Funding

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....

View All Insights