Supreme Court Denies Cert. in Rule 9(b) Pleading Requirements Case
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.03.14
The Supreme Court has followed the government's recommendation (discussed in a previous bullet point and blog post) not to hear an appeal challenging the dismissal of relator's complaint in U.S. ex rel. Nathan v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals, 707 F.3d 451 (4th Cir. 2013), for failure to allege specific false claims instead of a false scheme – an issue over which the government admits there is "at least some continuing uncertainty." The Court has invited the government's views on granting cert. in another prominent FCA case, KBR, Inc. v. U.S. ex rel. Carter (addressing the scope of the FCA's first-to-file bar and the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act) (discussed here), but the Solicitor General has not yet weighed in.
Contacts
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
