Fourth Circuit Rules In Custer Battles
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.13.09
The Fourth Circuit in United States ex rel. DRC, Inc. v. Custer Battles, LLC (4th Cir. April 10, 2009), affirmed summary judgment in the contractor's favor in a qui tam case alleging that Custer Battles (represented by C&M) had fraudulently induced the Coalition Provisional Authority to issue it a contract worth $17 million for security services at the Baghdad International Airport, agreeing "with the district court that the relators have not presented evidence sufficient to support a finding that Custer Battles violated the False Claims Act …." However, the Fourth Circuit also reversed judgment as a matter of law in favor of Custer Battles related to another contract Custer Battles had with the CPA for support services for the Dinar Exchange Program and remanded for further proceedings based on its findings that the district court erred in limiting the relators' claims to $3 million by using a "source-of-funds" analysis and in its presentment analysis under sections 3729 (a)(1) and (a)(2) of the FCA, including its holding that presentment must be proven under sections 3729 (a)(2) of the FCA, as the Supreme Court found to the contrary in Allison Engine while the case was on appeal.
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
