On August 4, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that protected activity under the “other efforts” prong of the False Claims Act’s (FCA) anti-retaliation provision relates to an employee’s objectively reasonable belief that the employer has committed fraud on the federal government rather than the employee’s concerns about other alleged regulatory violations.

Quick Hits

• In a precedential decision, the Third Circuit held that the FCA’s anti-retaliation provisions protect employees from retaliation for their efforts to stop fraud against the government, but those efforts must be related to an alleged FCA violation.
• The court distinguished the legal standard applicable to claims under the FCA’s anti-retaliation provisions and the FCA’s qui tam provisions.
• The court held that claims of retaliation under the FCA must demonstrate both a subjective belief of fraud by the employee and an objectively reasonable belief of such conduct.
• The court found that concerns about regulatory violations alone, such as FDA compliance, were not enough to plead a FCA anti-retaliation claim under the FCA’s “other efforts” prong.

Background

In a precedential decision in Lisenby v. Olympus Corp. of the Americas, No. 25-1480, the Third Circuit held that Congress’s 2009–2010 FCA amendments protect whistleblowing employees who make “other efforts” to stop violations of the FCA only “when they are motivated by an objectively reasonable belief that the employer has submitted, or...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMitAFBVV95cUxNTkRLdnZ5d04yQmI4LWdJMFhr...