False Claims Act
The Litigation Center plays an active role in using amicus briefs to present the views of the business community in litigation under the federal False Claims Act (“FCA”) and state false-claims laws, which are subject to abuse that can have serious adverse impacts on companies in a wide range of industries.
We frequently urge courts to enforce appropriate limits on false claims liability by applying proper standards for scienter, falsity, materiality, the public disclosure bar, and calculating damages. We have filed amicus briefs in support of the government’s authority to dismiss qui tam suits over relators’ objections. And we have encouraged courts to enforce proper limits on relators’ ability to rely on inferences from statistical analyses to allege fraud.
Latest Content
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit: Decided
View CaseThird Circuit affirms dismissal of False Claims Act suit against pharmaceutical manufacturers, concluding that relator failed to sufficiently plead falsity and materiality as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b). The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief urging the court to affirm dismissal on falsity, materiality, and other grounds.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Third Circuit to affirm dismissal of False Claims Act suit premised on a fraud-on-the agency theory that would require overriding the Food and Drug Administration's drug approval decisions. The brief argues that the suit failed to demonstrate falsity, materiality, or causation.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Eleventh Circuit to affirm district court decision holding that the False Claims Act’s qui tam provisions are unconstitutional. The brief explains that the qui tam provisions violate the Vesting Clause, the Appointments Clause, and the Take Care Clause of Article II of the Constitution, and that historical practice cannot salvage the provisions’ affront to Article II.Texas Supreme Court: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Texas Supreme Court to grant review of decision holding that a provision of the Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act, the state’s false-claims statute, penalizes even immaterial omissions. The brief also argues that the supreme court should separately grant review to ensure rigorous enforcement of the statute’s materiality requirement.U.S. Supreme Court: Decided
View CaseSupreme Court holds that reimbursement requests submitted to the Federal Communications Commission’s E-Rate program constitute “claims” subject to the False Claims Act. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief urging the Court to adopt a less expansive construction of “claim” and maintain essential limitations on FCA liability. The U.S. Chamber previously filed amicus briefs in both the district court and Seventh Circuit.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Supreme Court to hold that reimbursement requests submitted to Federal Communications Commission’s E-Rate program are not “claims” subject to False Claims Act. The Chamber previously filed amicus briefs in the Seventh Circuit and district court.U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit: Decided
View CaseFirst Circuit holds that 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b(g) requires but-for causation. The statute provides that “a claim that includes items or services resulting from a violation of” the Anti-Kickback Statute is a false claim under the False Claims Act. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief urging the court to hold that but-for causation is required.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging First Circuit to hold that 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b(g) requires but-for causation. The statute provides that “a claim that includes items or services resulting from a violation of” the Anti-Kickback Statute is a false claim under the False Claims Act.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Fourth Circuit to affirm dismissal, for lack of scienter and falsity, of False Claims Act (FCA) case on remand from the Supreme Court in light of U.S. ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu, Inc. After Schutte, dismissal of a FCA complaint is required when both (1) the plaintiff failed to plausibly allege any subjective beliefs as to the defendant and (2) the defendant made reasonable assumptions about the meaning of relevant legal requirements. The Chamber previously filed a brief in this litigation.Texas Supreme Court: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging the Supreme Court of Texas to hold that the qui tam provisions of the Texas Medicaid Fraud Prevention Act, the state’s False Claims Act, violate the Texas Constitution’s separation-of-powers principles.U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit: Resolved without decision
View CaseCase dismissed.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging First Circuit to hold that 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b(g) – which provides that “a claim that includes items or services resulting from a violation of” the Anti-Kickback Statute is a false claim under the False Claims Act – requires but-for causation.U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida: Decided
View CaseDistrict court dismisses False Claims Act case, holding that the qui tam provisions violate the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution. The U.S. Chamber filed two amicus briefs in this case and presented oral argument before the district court, supporting this outcome.After presenting oral argument, U.S. Chamber files supplemental amicus brief, at district court’s invitation, concluding that Founding-era historical evidence does not suggest that qui tam False Claims Act litigation is constitutional.U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina: Decided
View CaseDistrict court denies defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings without prejudice, concluding that defendants must seek to amend their answer before challenging constitutionality of the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA). The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief urging the district court to hold that the qui tam provisions of the FCA violate the separation of powers.District court denies defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings without prejudice, concluding that defendants must seek to amend their answer before challenging constitutionality of the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief urging the district court to hold that the qui tam provisions violate the separation of powers.U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging district court to hold that the qui tam provisions of the federal False Claims Act (FCA) are unconstitutional. By taking the enforcement of the laws out of the hands of the President, the FCA’s qui tam provisions violate the separation of powers.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit: Decided
View CaseSeventh Circuit denies petition for rehearing and holds that submissions made to private corporation under federal E-Rate program constitute “claims” subject to the False Claims Act. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief opposing this outcome.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Seventh Circuit to grant rehearing and hold that submissions to private corporation, not funded by federal government, do not constitute “claims” subject to the False Claims Act. The Chamber previously filed an amicus brief when this case was at the district court.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Seventh Circuit to apply False Claims Act’s falsity and scienter elements to protect defendants who reasonably interpret complex requirements, inform regulators, and receive no objection.U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging D.C. Circuit to enforce the False Claims Act’s public disclosure bar by affirming dismissal of lawsuit based on information that defendants filed in FCC and SEC administrative proceedings.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit: Decided
View CaseThird Circuit vacates grant of summary judgment to defendant in False Claims Act case, holding that jury must be allowed to determine materiality despite the government’s prolonged inaction on the relators’ fraud allegations. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief opposing this result.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Third Circuit to hold, in False Claims Act case, that allegedly false claims were not material as a matter of law where the undisputed evidence showed that the government investigated plaintiffs’ allegations but continued to pay defendant’s claims and failed to take any steps to recoup payments.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: Decided
View CaseFourth Circuit reverses dismissal of False Claims Act suit, holding that complaint plausibly alleged that Medicaid eligibility requirements were material. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief opposing this outcome.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Fourth Circuit to enforce the False Claims Act’s materiality requirement and to hold that false statements, made by an individual employee of the defendant, concerning unlawful requirements cannot be material under the FCA because the government was required to disregard those unlawful requirements (and thus to disregard the false statements as well). The U.S. Chamber previously filed an amicus brief in this case before the federal district court.U.S. Supreme Court: Decided
View CaseSupreme Court affirms dismissal requested by government of False Claims Act qui tam suit, where government had initially declined to intervene in the case. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief supporting this outcome.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Supreme Court to avoid serious constitutional problems by reading the False Claims Act to allow the government to dismiss a qui tam action after initially declining to intervene in the case.U.S. Supreme Court: Decided
View CaseU.S. Supreme Court rejects Safeco standard in False Claims Act context. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief opposing this outcome.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Supreme Court to hold that if a defendant’s conduct was consistent with an objectively reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous provision, the defendant cannot be liable under the False Claims Act unless authoritative guidance warned the defendant away from that interpretation.California Court of Appeal: Decided
View CaseCalifornia Court of Appeal reverses trial court’s dismissal of litigation brought under state False Claims Act based on statistical inferences drawn from publicly disclosed material. The U.S. Chamber had filed a coalition amicus brief urging affirmance.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging California Court of Appeal to affirm the trial court’s dismissal of litigation brought under state False Claims Act based on statistical inferences drawn from publicly disclosed material for failure to plead a fraud claim with particularity or, in the alternative, because the public disclosure bar applies to the complaint.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: Decided
View CaseSecond Circuit affirms dismissal of False Claims Act suit, applying the pre-2010 version of the public disclosure bar. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief supporting this outcome.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Second Circuit to reject plaintiffs’ contention that in a False Claims Act case, the pre-2010 public disclosure bar provisions are triggered only by a prior public disclosure that involved the exact same allegations at issue in the case and that specifically named the defendant in the case. The brief also urges the court to uphold the robust application of Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) in FCA cases.