1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Fourth Circuit Declines to Address Use of Stat Sampling in FCA Cases

Fourth Circuit Declines to Address Use of Stat Sampling in FCA Cases

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.16.17

On February 14, the Fourth Circuit issued an opinion in U.S. ex rel. Michaels v. Agape Senior Cmty. Inc. on one of the two key issues that the district court had certified for interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b): (1) whether the government possesses an unreviewable veto authority over proposed settlements and (2) whether statistical sampling is an appropriate methodology for establishing liability and damages in False Claims Act cases. On the first issue, the Fourth Circuit joined the Fifth and Sixth Circuits and held that the government has an unreviewable right to veto FCA settlements even after electing not to intervene. On statistical sampling, the district court had ruled that statistical sampling was not permissible because of the facts and available evidence in the case, but upon review, the Fourth Circuit determined that the appeal of that issue had been “improvidently granted” because the use of sampling is an evidentiary issue, not a pure question of law as required for interlocutory review. Accordingly, companies and FCA practitioners hoping for appellate-level guidance on the controversial issue of sampling will have to wait for another day.

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....