Materiality Rules: Escobar Changes the Game
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.15.17
On May 1, 2017, the Third Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of a relator’s claims in United States ex rel. Petratos, et al. v. Genentech Inc. in a False Claims Act (FCA) case in which the relator alleged that pharmaceutical manufacturer Genentech had suppressed data about a cancer drug’s side effects. Applying the materiality analysis from the Supreme Court’s decision in Universal Health Servs., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, the Third Circuit “join[ed] the many other federal courts that have recognized the heightened materiality standard after [Escobar]” and found that the relator failed to allege that Genentech made misrepresentations that were material to government’s decision to pay claims. The Third Circuit’s decision in Petratos is just one of the nearly 100 court opinions that have cited Escobar in the eleven months since the Court’s landmark ruling on the on the implied-certification theory of liability. In a “Feature Comment” published in The Government Contractor, C&M attorneys analyze some of the key cases and explore the developing trends in the wake of Escobar.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.28.26
Earlier this month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdrew a February 2024 Biden administration proposed rule, “Definition of Hazardous Waste Applicable to Corrective Action for Releases From Solid Waste Management Units,” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).[1] The withdrawn proposal would have revised RCRA corrective action regulations to expressly apply the broader statutory definition of “hazardous waste,” rather than only the narrower regulatory definition. Now, EPA is maintaining the status quo for corrective action under RCRA. However, EPA’s withdrawal of its proposed RCRA hazardous waste definition makes no mention of its corresponding proposal from 2024 to list nine per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as RCRA hazardous constituents.[2] This disjointed withdrawal, while providing some certainty for regulated entities, does not resolve how EPA plans to address PFAS under the RCRA program.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 05.28.26
Texas Targets Big Tech With Wave of Suits and Investigations, Part of Nationwide Trend
Client Alert | 7 min read | 05.27.26
Colorado Hits Reset on AI Regulation: SB 26-189 Repeals and Reenacts the Colorado AI Act
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.27.26
Don’t Get Left in the Doghouse: The Federal Circuit’s Global K9 Case and the Duty to Intervene


