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 | 2 min read | 12.19.25
GAO Cautions Agencies—Over-Redact at Your Own Peril
Bid protest practitioners in recent years have witnessed agencies’ increasing efforts to limit the production of documents and information in response to Government Accountability Office (GAO) bid protests—often will little pushback from GAO. This practice has underscored the notable difference in the scope of bid protest records before GAO versus the Court of Federal Claims. However, in Tiger Natural Gas, Inc., B-423744, Dec. 10, 2025, 2025 CPD ¶ __, GAO made clear that there are limits to the scope of redactions, and GAO will sustain a protest where there is insufficient evidence that the agency’s actions were reasonable.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 12.19.25
In Bid to Ban “Woke AI,” White House Imposes Transparency Requirements on Contractors
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.19.25
Navigating California’s Evolving Microplastics Landscape in 2026
Client Alert | 19 min read | 12.18.25
2025 GAO Bid Protest Annual Report: Where Have All the Protests Gone?
