Relator's Detailed Allegations Cannot Overcome Public Disclosure Bar
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.04.13
In U.S. ex rel. Mateski v. Raytheon Co. (C.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2013), the district court dismissed the qui tam relator's action under the pre-2010 "public disclosure" provision, holding that, although the relator's allegations were much more specific than the information which had been publicly disclosed in the media, congressional hearings, and administrative reports, the broadly worded public disclosures on the same topics were sufficient to supply the government with enough information to initiate an investigation and, therefore, barred the action. The court rejected the relator's novel suggestion that it apply a Rule 9(b) particularity requirement to the publicly disclosed information, and it rejected his contention that he was an original source because (a) he had no hand in the public disclosure (a requirement which not all circuits apply), (b) he failed to provide his information to the government before filing suit, and (c) he could not demonstrate that he saw the fraud with his own eyes.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Design patents offer protection for the ornamental appearance of a product, focusing on aspects like its shape and surface decoration, as opposed to the functional aspects protected by utility patents. The scope of a design patent is defined by the drawings and any descriptive language within the patent itself. Recent decisions by the Federal Circuit emphasize the need for clarity in the prosecution history of a design patent in order to preserve desired scope to preserve intentional narrowing (and to avoid unintentional sacrifice of desired claim scope).
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
Client Alert | 4 min read | 11.18.25
DOJ Announces Major Enforcement Actions Targeting North Korean Remote IT Worker Schemes
