Whistleblower Rebuffs Counterclaim for Disclosing Confidential Information
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.20.16
In U.S. ex rel. Cieszynski v. LifeWatch Servs. (N.D. Ill., May 9), the court dismissed the defendant’s counterclaim against a former employee and FCA whistleblower, ruling that the whistleblower’s disclosure of protected patient information fell within the public policy protections for whistleblowers. As described in a post on the Whistleblower Watch Blog, there has been an increase in recent years of FCA defendants raising counterclaims based on breaches of confidentiality agreements, and this will likely remain an active area of litigation until the courts clearly define what documents an FCA whistleblower can take from an employer and how the whistleblower can use those documents to support FCA allegations.
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
