DAM Contractor's Underbidding Insufficient For FCA Liability
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.21.05
Affirming summary judgment, the D.C. Circuit in U.S. ex rel. Bettis v. Oderbrecht Contractors (Jan. 11, 2005) held that evidence that a dam contractor (1) underbid, (2) reaffirmed its underbid, and (3) claimed that it would use cost-saving measures it never employed did not permit the conclusion that the contractor fraudulently induced the Army Corps of Engineers to award it the contract. The Court acknowledged that claims submitted for payment under a contract that was fraudulently induced can give rise to civil False Claims Act liability, but found in this case that the contractor's underbid was not a promise that its estimated costs were accurate, only that it would perform the dam work at the unit prices it bid, such that submission of claims for payment under the contract, including claims for equitable adjustments above the contract price, were not false claims.
Insights
Client Alert | 10 min read | 03.19.26
[1] In a recent development, the UK Supreme Court ruled that Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) are not excluded from patentability due to being a computer program “as such.” In doing so, the Court set out the framework of a new test for the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to use when evaluating the patentability of computer. The ruling breaks down barriers to the patenting of AI algorithms in the UK and paves the way for a wider change in the UK IPO’s approach to assessing excluded subject matter.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 03.19.26
Client Alert | 6 min read | 03.18.26
CFTC Takes Additional Steps Toward Prediction Market Regulation: What You Need to Know
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.18.26
