False Claims Act

BLOG: Have the Flood Gates Opened?: Cisco Settles First-Of-Its-Kind Cybersecurity False Claims Act Litigation

August 2, 2019
By Matthew E. Feinberg
On July 31, 2019, a False Claims Act matter pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York was unsealed, revealing an $8.6 million dollar settlement that may have far-reaching implications on government contractors. The litigation, United States, et al., ex rel. James Glenn v. Cisco Systems, Inc., was initiated in 2011 on behalf of the federal government and a number of state governments, after a Denmark-based employee of a Cisco affiliate was terminated allegedly for reporting a flaw in one of Cisco's video surveillance products. With the rapidly developing role of cybersecurity in federal procurements, government contractors should clearly understand their obligations, representations, and certifications to avoid False Claims Act liability and ensure compliance.
[READ MORE]

BLOG: Cybersecurity, Implied Certifications, and the False Claims Act

July 22, 2019
By Isaias "Cy" Alba IV
As I am sure many of you know and have read about already, the first False Claims Act ("FCA") case, US Ex rel. Markus v. AeroJet Rocketdyne Holdings, Inc., et al., No. 2:15-cv-2245, has been filed in the Eastern District of California by a disgruntled former Director of Cyber Security Compliance and Controls, and it survived a motion to dismiss in May of this year. When the existence of the AeroJet case is layered over the U.S. Supreme Court's findings in Universal Health Servs., Inc. v. US Ex rel. Escobar, 136 S.Ct. 1989 (2016), which confirmed FCA liability based upon implied certifications, a worrisome result can occur. Namely, can the disgruntled employees, aggrieved subcontractors, consultants who see an opening for a quick buck, spouses in the midst of a contentious divorce, or any other random individual with a basic knowledge of your IT systems file an FCA case against you claiming that you impliedly certified, by merely accepting a federal contract, that you were in full and unequivocal compliance with all NIST 800-171 standards and that you had all documentation required by DFARS 252.204-7012. The answer is absolutely "YES." Small to mid-sized government contractors should note that their lack of diligence can be used as evidence of recklessness which gives rise to FCA liability.
[READ MORE]

BLOG: Learn from Others' Mistakes and Avoid an FCA Claim

June 20, 2019
By Michelle E. Litteken
The recent settlement reached by International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), Cúram Software Ltd. (Cúram), and the Department of Justice provides a useful lesson for government contractors—especially contractors in the healthcare industry.
[READ MORE]

BLOG: In Win for Whistleblowers, Supreme Court Clarifies Statute of Limitations for False Claims Act Actions Where Government Elects Not to Intervene

May 20, 2019
By Timothy F. Valley
Recently, in Cochise Consultancy, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Hunt, the Supreme Court resolved a circuit split and clarified in a unanimous decision that the statute of limitations period for qui tam actions where the Government declines to intervene could extend to ten years, if the plaintiff can show when the Government knew or should have known of the material facts related to the alleged false claim. The Supreme Court noted that under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3731(b), civil actions must be brought either (1) within six years of when the alleged violation occurred; or (2) "[three] years after ‘the official of the United States charged with responsibility to act in the circumstances' knew or should have known the relevant facts, but not more than [ten] years after the violation . . . ." And, whichever period is later qualifies as the limitations period, even if the Government chooses not to intervene in the action.
[READ MORE]

BLOG: Justice Department Issues New False Claims Act Guidance on Cooperation Credit That May Reduce FCA-Defendant Liability

May 16, 2019
By Matthew E. Feinberg
Last week, on May 7, 2019, the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") announced the issuance of formal guidance to clarify the manner in which the DOJ allocates credit to defendants who cooperate with government investigations in False Claims Act ("FCA") matters. In a press release from the Office of Public Affairs, the DOJ explained that it "has taken important steps to incentivize companies to voluntarily disclose misconduct and cooperate with [DOJ] investigations[.]" Specifically with regard to the FCA, the DOJ announced, "False Claims Act defendants may merit a more favorable resolution by providing meaningful assistance to the [DOJ] – from voluntary disclosure, which is the most valuable form of cooperation, to various other efforts, including the sharing of information gleaned from an internal investigation and taking remedial steps through new or improved compliance programs."
[READ MORE]
Please fill following information to download presentation