Solicitor General Weighs in (Sort of) on Rule 9(b)
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.27.14
In October 2013, the Supreme Court invited the Solicitor General to express the government's views on a pending petition for certiorari in U.S. ex rel. Nathan v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals, whose central issue concerns the requisite level of particularity required by Rule 9(b) in FCA cases. The Solicitor General has now asked the Supreme Court to deny the relator's petition, calling the case "not a suitable vehicle" for resolving the particularity question (because the lower court reached the correct result on other grounds), while expressing the government's view that "a qui tam complaint satisfies Rule 9(b) if it contains detailed allegations supporting a plausible inference that false claims were submitted to the government, even if the complaint does not identify specific requests for payment"(emphasis added).
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 06.09.26
Is Stock-a-palooza Over? Supreme Court allows SEC to Pursue Disgorgement
On June 4, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) can continue to pursue disgorgement as an equitable remedy in securities fraud cases without showing pecuniary loss by investors. The Court’s ruling in Sripetch v. SEC resolves a split between the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which concluded that the SEC must demonstrate pecuniary loss, and the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the First and Ninth Circuits, which declined to require such a showing.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.09.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 06.09.26
Client Alert | 11 min read | 06.08.26
