Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Business Crimes Hotline
3M Settles False Claims Act Lawsuit over Defective Military Earplugs
On July 26, 2018, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a False Claims Act settlement linked to defective ear plugs manufactured by 3M Company (3M), a the multinational manufacturing company headquartered in St. Paul, Minnesota. As noted in the DOJ's press release, without a finding of liability, 3M agreed to pay $9.1 million dollars based on whistleblower allegations that the company knowingly sold the Defense Logistics Agency, the combat logistics support branch of the Department of Defense, defective dual-ended Combat Arms Earplugs, Version 2 (CAEv2). The DOJ indicated that, in distributing this product, 3M — including through its predecessor entity, Aearo Technologies Inc. — failed to reveal that defects lessened its hearing protection effectiveness. Specifically, the ear plugs were too short for a user's ears and, over time, loosened, causing performance issues.
The 3M settlement results from the whistleblower (qui tam) provisions of the False Claims Act, which permit individuals and companies to make claims when there is evidence of fraud against the U.S. government. The whistleblower provisions afford individuals the right to file suit under seal in a United States District Court on behalf of the government and share in approximately 15% – 30% of the profits. In fiscal year 2017, the DOJ recovered over $3.7 billion from False Claims Act settlements and judgments, with $3.4 billion resulting from lawsuits filed under the whistleblower provisions. As a result of these settlements and judgments, the DOJ paid out $392 million to whistleblowers. 3M's competitor and ear plug manufacturer, Moldex-Metric Inc. filed the lawsuit in 2016 and will receive over $1,911,000 million. See, United States ex rel. Moldex-Metric v. 3M Company, Case No. 3:16-cv-1533-MBS (D.S.C.). The settlement was the result of coordination between the DOJ's Civil Division, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of South Carolina, the Army Criminal Investigation Command, and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Law Firms are Reducing Redundant Real Estate by Bringing Support Services Back to the Office
A trend analysis of the benefits and challenges of bringing back administrative, word processing and billing services to law offices.
New York's Latest Cybersecurity Commitment
On Aug. 9, 2023, Gov. Kathy Hochul introduced New York's inaugural comprehensive cybersecurity strategy. In sum, the plan aims to update government networks, bolster county-level digital defenses, and regulate critical infrastructure.
Bit Parts
Summary Judgment Denied Defendant in Declaratory Action by Producer of To Kill a Mockingbird Broadway Play Seeking Amateur Theatrical Rights
Risks of “Baseball Arbitration” in Resolving Real Estate Disputes
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.
Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel
'Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel is a continuation of the discussion of client expectations and the disconnect that often occurs. And although the outside attorneys should be pursuing how inside-counsel actually think, inside counsel should make an effort to impart this information without waiting to be asked.