Fourth Circuit Weighs in on Public Disclosure Bar and Retroactivity
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.13.13
The Fourth Circuit in U.S. ex rel. Radcliffe v. Purdue Pharma.(Dec. 12, 2013) became the first court of appeals to address whether the FCA's public disclosure bar is still jurisdictional after its 2010 amendment by the Affordable Care Act (a topic about which Crowell & Moring attorneys wrote articles in March and September) and held that it is not, reasoning that the word jurisdiction was excised from the statute and that the government was newly empowered to veto application of the bar. This decision came in the context of a broader analysis in which the court clarified that the date of the allegedly fraudulent conduct, not the date that the complaint was filed, governs potential retroactive effect.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 10.30.26
Recent sustain decisions by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC and Reliance Test & Technology send a clear message: when an agency tries to fix a Procurement Integrity Act (PIA) violation by committing a second one, the cure can be just as fatal as the disease. The cases involved the U.S. Air Force’s $1.8 billion procurement for O&M services at Elgin Air Force Base. During discussions, the Air Force inadvertently released a pricing overview slide with all offerors’ bottom-line evaluated costs to Reliance Test & Technology, which immediately notified the agency of the error. In response, the Air Force decided to level the playing field by providing the same information to all the other offerors in the procurement, stating, “[o]fferors may consider this disclosure in their [final proposal revision].”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.29.26
What University Licensors Should Learn From TexasLDPC v. Broadcom
Client Alert | 2 min read | 10.28.26
Debriefing to Dead Briefing: How to Avoid Dismissal by Identifying “Required” Debriefings
