Podcast - FTC Commissioner Dismissals: Background and Implications
The Briefing – Late Night, Early Dismissal: The Santos-Kimmel Copyright Case
(Podcast) The Briefing – Late Night, Early Dismissal: The Santos-Kimmel Copyright Case
Fifth Circuit Affirms District Court’s Striking of Class Allegations
Eighth Circuit Reverses Dismissal of Putative Class Claims
Nota Bene Episode 98: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Mark on U.S. Antitrust Law for 2020 with Thomas Dillickrath and Bevin Newman
Class Action Suit Against Instagram for New Terms of Service Dismissed
On April 14, 2025, the Seventh and Second Circuits each issued opinions narrowing the scope of advertising, marketing, and booking fee activities that run afoul of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS). See United States v....more
For over 160 years, the False Claims Act has let people bring claims on behalf of the U.S. government alleging fraud. In exchange, those individuals receive a portion of any recovery. In September, a federal district judge...more
On September 30, 2024, a federal judge for the Middle District of Florida issued a groundbreaking decision invalidating the qui tam provision of the False Claims Act (“FCA”) as unconstitutional because the relator (or...more
A valuable tool in filing whistleblower claims against companies related to government fraud took a potentially major hit this week when a federal judge in Florida ruled that a significant portion of the statutory scheme...more
On September 30, 2024, Judge Kathryn Mizelle of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida dismissed United States, ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC et al., a False Claims Act (FCA) case...more
On September 30, 2024, in U.S. ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates LLC, Judge Kathryn Mizelle in the Middle District of Florida dismissed a qui tam action under the False Claims Act (“FCA”) on the basis that the...more
The Supreme Court now has the opportunity to define “willfulness” under the federal criminal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS). In a declined qui tam case filed against McKesson Corporation, a pharmaceutical wholesaler, the...more
The False Claims Act (FCA) saw quite a bit of action at the Supreme Court in its most recent completed term. In this fourth and final installment of PilieroMazza’s blog series “The FCA at the Supreme Court,” we examine active...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court’s decision to dismiss a qui tam action brought under the False Claims Act (FCA) after analyzing the public disclosure bar channels. The case required the...more
DOJ may dismiss qui tam False Claims Act cases at any point, as long as it intervenes in the case and satisfies the deferential Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) standard. The US Supreme Court, in its 8-1 June 16,...more
On June 16, 2023, the Supreme Court ruled in United States ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., that (i) under the False Claims Act, the government may move to dismiss a False Claims Act (“FCA”) action...more
On Friday, June 16, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in United States, ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., that the federal government has authority to dismiss qui tam (or whistleblower) False Claims Act...more
Supreme Court Justices Signal Skepticism of Qui Tam Constitutionality - On Friday, June 16, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Department of Justice (DOJ) has the authority to dismiss qui tam suits brought under the...more
On June 16, 2023, the Supreme Court in United States ex rel. Polanksy v. Executive Health Resources, affirmed the Third Circuit’s deferential standard regarding the government’s ability to dismiss False Claims Act (FCA)...more
The United States Supreme Court has ruled in an 8-1 decision that the U.S. government has broad authority to dismiss whistleblower actions over the individual whistleblower’s objections so long as the government intervenes...more
On June 16, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the DOJ properly secured a dismissal of a whistleblower suit accusing Executive Health Resources Inc. of violating the False Claims Act by improperly billing Medicare....more
On June 16, 2023, in United States, ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., the US Supreme Court addressed the government’s authority to dismiss a qui tam False Claims Act (FCA) suit over a relator’s objection...more
The False Claims Act's ("FCA") use of qui tam relators (private individuals bringing suit on behalf of the government) has long raised both procedural and substantive challenges....more
On June 16, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an 8–1 decision in United States ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., pertaining to the government’s authority to dismiss False Claim Act (FCA)...more
On June 16, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, a closely watched case about the government’s power to dismiss a False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam lawsuit over a...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued two decisions today: United States ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., No. 21-1052: This case concerned the scope of the government’s authority to dismiss a...more
In this post, we summarize noteworthy False Claims Act (FCA) decisions so far from 2023. Each of the three circuit court opinions discussed here ruled in favor of the defendants on different aspects of the FCA: the Sixth...more
A recent U.S. District Court decision provides a good example of how federal courts will apply the public disclosure/original source rules in whistleblower cases alleging that health care providers violated the False Claims...more
The Department of Justice (DOJ) dismissal authority: Supreme Court will resolve Circuit split in standard, but DOJ seems unlikely to pick more fights with relators. For nearly two decades, when DOJ invoked its authority...more
Arguments were heard in the case of United States ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources, Inc., No. 21-1052 to determine whether and on what statutory grounds, the government, after initially declining to intervene,...more