1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Public Disclosure Of "Industry-Wide" Overbilling Practice Bars Qui Tam Suit Based Upon Similar But Undisclosed Fraudulent Transactions

Public Disclosure Of "Industry-Wide" Overbilling Practice Bars Qui Tam Suit Based Upon Similar But Undisclosed Fraudulent Transactions

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.21.06

In United States ex rel. Gear v. Emergency Medical Assocs. of Ill. , the Seventh Circuit took an expansive view of the False Claims Act's ["FCA"] "public disclosure" bar , concluding that media and governmental reports concerning the general type of unlawful scheme alleged in a qui tam complaint sufficed to defeat the court's jurisdiction, even though such reports did not identify the particular defendant or any specific instances of its alleged misconduct. Specifically, the Seventh Circuit held that medical journal articles and a series of Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General audits concerning "industry-wide" Medicare billing abuses in which hospitals sought reimbursement for services provided by residents as if they were licensed attending physicians, were "public disclosures" that barred the relator's complaint involving alleged similar overbilling schemes, despite the fact that the disclosures did not identify the two defendants or their specific fraudulent transactions.

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25

Defining Claim Terms by Implication: Lexicography Lessons from Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation

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....