Published in Law360 on March 20, 2023. Copyright 2023, Portfolio Media, Inc., publisher of Law360. Reprinted here with permission.
An issue that plagues False Claims Act practitioners and their clients is the circuit split on the degree of particularity as to the alleged falsity of the claims that relator plaintiffs must plead. Several circuits have adopted a strict pleading standard, while the majority of circuits have adopted a much more lenient pleading standard.
This divergence across circuit court pleading standards has caused uncertainty, which has been further exacerbated by the fact that each circuit appears to have a slightly different approach to the level of specificity required to comply with that circuit’s own interpretation of the pleading requirements for alleging fraud, set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b).
The U.S. Supreme Court has been reluctant to resolve the circuit split, but later this year it will hear U.S. v. Safeway Inc. and U.S. v. SuperValu Inc., two cases that involve the viability of FCA claims where the knowledge component involves an ambiguous compliance obligation an ambiguous compliance obligation. While this will not directly address the pleading standard, it will surely shed light on what the Supreme Court believes constitutes a claim under the FCA.
Regardless, the continued lack of uniformity in pleading requirements poses problems for companies that face increased risk of finding themselves subject to FCA lawsuits and...
Times of Malta's editorial team has demanded that alleged money-launderer Chris Spiteri remove false claims posted on Facebook against journalist Jacob Borg. An alert has also been filed with the ...