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 | 4 min read | 12.04.25
District Court Grants Preliminary Injunction Against Seller of Gray Market Snack Food Products
On November 12, 2025, Judge King in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington granted in part Haldiram India Ltd.’s (“Plaintiff” or “Haldiram”) motion for a preliminary injunction against Punjab Trading, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Punjab Trading”), a seller alleged to be importing and distributing gray market snack food products not authorized for sale in the United States. The court found that Haldiram was likely to succeed on the merits of its trademark infringement claim because the products at issue, which were intended for sale in India, were materially different from the versions intended for sale in the U.S., and for this reason were not genuine products when sold in the U.S. Although the court narrowed certain overbroad provisions in the requested order, it ultimately enjoined Punjab Trading from importing, selling, or assisting others in selling the non-genuine Haldiram products in the U.S. market.
Client Alert | 21 min read | 12.04.25
Highlights: CMS’s Proposed Rule for Medicare Part C & D (CY 2027 NPRM)
Client Alert | 11 min read | 12.01.25
