U.S. ex Rel. Grubbs v. Kanneganti

Holding that defendants received adequate notice in a False Claims Act case where the complaint alleged a scheme to submit false claims and enough details that the defendants—who "will be in possession of the most relevant records, such as patients’ charts, doctors’ notes, and internal billing records"—could adequately investigate and defend the claims

United States ex rel. Thompson v. Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp.

Holding that an AKS violation may support a claim under the FCA under a false certification theory

U.S. ex Rel. Lusby v. Rolls-Royce Corp.

Holding that a plaintiff need not allege a specific individual claim to satisfy Rule 9(b)

Foglia v. Renal Ventures Mgmt., Llc.

Holding that plaintiff alleging fraudulent scheme need not plead representative sample of fraud

U.S. ex Rel. Bledsoe v. Community Health Sys

Holding that a complaint did not meet Rule 9(b) ’s pleading requirement where it failed to "specify the names of any individuals involved"

U.S. ex Rel. Hutcheson v. Blackstone Medical

Holding that hospitals' claims for reimbursement of doctor's services using medical devices were "false" under the FCA where the doctors had accepted kickbacks from the medical device manufacturer

Walburn v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

Holding earlier complaint could not preempt a later-filed action under the first-to-file bar where it failed to comply with Rule 9(b)

Grynberg v. Koch Gateway Pipeline Co.

Holding that first-to-file rule "is a jurisdictional limit on the courts' power to hear certain duplicative qui tam suits"

Cooper v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Fla.

Holding allegations of widespread Medicaid fraud made in disclosures in which a particular insurance company was not specifically named or otherwise directly identifiable were insufficient to trigger the public disclosure bar

U.S. Duxbury v. Ortho Biotech Pro

Holding that, in actions “in which the defendant induced third parties to file false claims with the government,” it was not necessary to “provid[e] details as to each false claim” if there were “factual or statistical evidence to strengthen the inference of fraud beyond possibility”

Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

Section 3730 - Civil actions for false claims

Granting the government primary responsibility for conducting suit

Section 331 - Prohibited acts

Prohibiting the sale of adulterated foods

Section 1320a-7b - Criminal penalties for acts involving Federal health care programs

Prohibiting the solicitation or receipt of "remuneration" in exchange for referrals

Section 352 - Misbranded drugs and devices

Setting labeling requirements for drug products

Section 3731 - False claims procedure

In § 3731(a), Congress apparently used the phrase "under section 3730" to mean all three § 3730 actions. § 3731(a) (a "subpoena requiring the attendance of a witness at a trial or hearing conducted under section 3730 of this title may be served at any place in the United States").

Section 46:439.2 - Qui tam action procedures

Section 310.3 - Definitions and interpretations

Giving examples of when the FDA considers a drug to be new, including cases involving “newness for drug use of any substance which composes such drug, in whole or in part”