1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Defendant’s Reasonable Interpretation of Ambiguous Regulation Negates FCA Liability

Defendant’s Reasonable Interpretation of Ambiguous Regulation Negates FCA Liability

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.01.15

The D.C. Circuit overturned a jury verdict against MWI Corp., represented by C&M, in a long-running civil FCA suit in which the government asserted claims for approximately $225 million in trebled damages (plus additional civil penalties), alleging that false claims and statements were submitted to the Export-Import Bank in connection with eight loans to Nigeria for the purchase of MWI's water pumps. The court held that there was no evidence that the government "had officially warned MWI away from its otherwise facially reasonable interpretation of [an] undefined and ambiguous [regulatory] term" and ruled that, in such a situation, the FCA's knowledge/scienter element cannot be established.


Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.16.26

Federal Circuit Holds Challengers to CICA Stay Overrides Need Not Satisfy Four-Factor Injunctive Relief Test

In a significant decision for government contractors, on April 15, 2026, in Life Science Logistics, LLC v. United States, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that bid protesters challenging an agency’s override of an automatic stay of contract performance under the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) need not satisfy the demanding four-factor test traditionally required for preliminary injunctive relief.  In so doing, the Federal Circuit clarified that CICA stay override challenges need only demonstrate that the override decision was arbitrary and capricious—nothing more....