Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act Available to Qui Tam Relators Even When the U.S. Does Not Intervene
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.20.13
In U.S. ex rel. Carter v. Halliburton Co. (Mar. 18, 2013), the Fourth Circuit held that (1) dismissals of a qui tam plaintiff's FCA complaint under the first-to-file bar should be without prejudice, thereby allowing a relator to refile her complaint after the original action has been dismissed and is no longer "pending"; and (2) the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (WSLA), which tolls "any statute of limitations applicable to any offense[ ] involving fraud or attempted fraud against the United States" "[w]hen the United States is at war," applies (i) to both civil and criminal fraud against the United States, (ii) even without a formal declaration of war, and (iii) regardless of whether the U.S. intervenes. In a partial dissent, Judge Agee argued that allowing relators to benefit from the WSLA when the government has not intervened provides a "strong financial incentive for relators to allow false claims to build up over time before they filed, thereby increasing their own potential recovery."
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.10.26
In Utech, Inc. v. United States, No. 24-1586 (Fed. Cir. June 24, 2026), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit clarified that in most cases, a pre-award protest must be filed before the proposal submission deadline to avoid the Blue & Gold waiver rule. This decision, while nonprecedential, is in line with U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) precedent, which has long held that pre-award protests must be filed before the proposal submission deadline.
Client Alert | 5 min read | 07.10.26
Client Alert | 6 min read | 07.09.26
EU Steel Overcapacity Regulation: New Permanent Measure in Force from 1 July 2026
Client Alert | 5 min read | 07.09.26
Made in the USA? Prove It: FTC Marks America's 250th with Crack Down on Domestic Origin Claims

