FEMA to Release New Emergency Management Priorities and Allocation System to Govern FEMA DPA Title I Activities
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.12.20
On May 13, 2020, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will publish an interim final rule establishing the Emergency Management Priorities and Allocation System (EMPAS) pursuant to Title I of the Defense Production Act (DPA). As drafted, EMPAS will apply beyond the current COVID-19 context and will become part of the Federal Priority and Allocations System (which includes, for example, the Defense Priorities and Allocation System (DPAS) and the Health Resources Priority and Allocations System (HRPAS)). Although largely similar to the DPAS and HRPAS, EMPAS also provides express authorization to issue rated orders to facilitate sales of health and medical resources to third parties while simultaneously rejecting any government financial liability for such orders (44 C.F.R. § 333.12(c) and 333.19). EMPAS is effective immediately upon publication, and comments on the interim final rule will be accepted through June 12, 2020.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
