Supreme Court to Tackle Implied Certification FCA Liability
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.08.15
The Supreme Court has granted review in Universal Health Servs. v. U.S. ex rel. Escobar to decide whether (1) the implied certification theory of legal falsity under the False Claims Act is ever viable; and (2) whether, if it is, a contractor's reimbursement claim can be legally false under that theory if the provider failed to comply with a statute, regulation, or contractual provision that does not state that it is a condition of payment. As described in a recent article by C&M attorneys (available here), eight of the thirteen circuits have accepted the implied certification theory in some form, with only the Seventh Circuit rejecting the theory outright, but the approving circuits have articulated varying tests for its application.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25
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.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.14.25
Microplastics Update: Regulatory and Litigation Developments in 2025
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.13.25
