FCA Settlement Does Not Bar Third-Party Claims
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.03.09
In Cell Therapeutics Inc. v. Lash Group Inc. (9th Cir. Nov. 18, 2009), the Ninth Circuit ruled that an FCA settlement entered into between a drug manufacturer and the government and relator did not preclude the drug manufacturer from bringing state common law claims against an expert in Medicare reimbursement protocol for having allegedly advised that the false Medicare billings were proper. Although a company found to have violated the FCA may not shift its FCA liability to a third party, the suit was not foreclosed because, first, "independent" claims for damages were asserted; and, second, a settlement agreement without an admission of FCA liability does not constitute a finding of FCA liability, which could preclude recovery against a third party.
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25
Claim construction is a key stage of most patent litigations, where the court must decide the meaning of any disputed terms in the patent claims. Generally, claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning except under two circumstances: (1) when the patentee acts as its own lexicographer and sets out a definition for the term; and (2) when the patentee disavows the full scope of the term either in the specification or during prosecution. Thorner v. Sony Comput. Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012). The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. highlights that patentees can act as their own lexicographers through consistent, interchangeable usage of terms across the specification, effectively defining terms by implication.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.14.25
Microplastics Update: Regulatory and Litigation Developments in 2025
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.13.25
