Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Columns & Departments

In the Courts Image

In the Courts

Kate Monks

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the majority of an $11 million jury verdict brought by a whistleblower who claimed that his company fired him for raising concerns about possible FCPA violations.

Features

Supreme Court Ties SEC's Hands in Whistleblower Case Image

Supreme Court Ties SEC's Hands in Whistleblower Case

Janice G. Inman

With its decision in <i>Digital Realty v. Somers</i>, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a blow to companies interested in learning of their own securities violations before the government gets the heads-up. The case's outcome means whistleblowers who might have reported violations internally will be incentivized to bypass their own companies' compliance mechanisms in favor of immediate reporting to the SEC.

Features

Takeaways from the Swift End to <i>Waymo v. Uber</i> Image

Takeaways from the Swift End to <i>Waymo v. Uber</i>

Ross Todd

The details might not be quite as dramatic as they were in <i>Waymo v. Uber</i>, but lawyers expect trade secrets to continue to be a fertile source for litigation.

Features

The False Claims Act Seal: The DOJ's Position Image

The False Claims Act Seal: The DOJ's Position

Andrew W. Schilling & Megan E. Whitehill

<b><i>Part Two of a Three-Part Article</i></b><p>Notwithstanding the absence of an explicit gag order in the statute, the DOJ takes the position that, even if the relator properly files the case under seal at the outset, that relator can later “breach the seal,” and be subject to judicial sanction, if he or she discloses the existence of the <i>qui tam</i> to others.

Features

The False Claims Act Seal: Does It Bind and Gag the Defendant? Image

The False Claims Act Seal: Does It Bind and Gag the Defendant?

Andrew W. Schilling & Megan E. Whitehill

<b><i>Part One of a Two-Part Article</i></b><p>A company that finds itself the target of a federal fraud investigation often faces the fraught question of whether it may, or even must, disclose the existence of that investigation to third parties, such as its investors, shareholders, major creditors, or insurers. The question can be even more complicated if that investigation is being pursued under the False Claims Act and arises as the result of a sealed <i>qui tam</i> complaint.

Features

Internal Whistleblowers Image

Internal Whistleblowers

Matthew B. Schiff & Kathryn C. Nadro

<b><i>SCOTUS Review of Dodd-Frank to Change the Landscape</i></b><p>In June, the Supreme Court granted <i>certiorari</i> in <i>Digital Realty Trust Inc. v. Somers</i>, to review a Ninth Circuit decision regarding SEC whistleblowing protections. The Court's ruling is highly anticipated, as it will clarify the landscape for whistleblower protections.

Features

Follow Up on False Claims Act Actions Image

Follow Up on False Claims Act Actions

Jacqueline C. Wolff & Benjamin J. Wolfert

The authors discuss several steps to take in order to avoid the pitfalls that could accompany lengthy exposure vis-à-vis state false claims actions.

Features

Internal Whistleblowers Image

Internal Whistleblowers

Matthew B. Schiff & Kathryn C. Nadro

<b><i>Scotus Review of Dodd-Frank to Change the Landscape</i></b><p>On June 26, 2017, the Supreme Court granted <i>certiorari</i> in <i>Digital Realty Trust Inc. v. Somers</i>, to review a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision regarding SEC whistleblowing protections. The Court's ruling is highly anticipated, as it will clarify the landscape for whistleblower protections.

Features

Follow Up on False Claims Act Actions Image

Follow Up on False Claims Act Actions

Jacqueline C. Wolff & Benjamin J. Wolfert

This article discusses what you can do to mitigate against the risk inherent in prolonged exposure. While a 50-state survey is beyond the scope of this article, the authors identify issues that should be on the forefront of your mind if faced with potential state false claims act liability.

Features

<b><I>Escobar's</I></b> Effect on False Claims Act <b><I>Qui Tam</I></b> Actions Image

<b><I>Escobar's</I></b> Effect on False Claims Act <b><I>Qui Tam</I></b> Actions

Danielle Corcione, Daniel Wenner, Robert Marasco & Jennifer Mitchell

The Supreme Court, in <I>Universal Health Servs., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar</I>, altered the landscape for FCA litigation. In this case, the Supreme Court instructed lower courts to scrutinize the materiality of the false statements to the government's decision to pay a claim; in doing so, the Court raised the bar for successful prosecution of <I>qui tam</I> claims.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • The Roadmap of Litigation Analytics
    Litigation analytics can be considered a roadmap of sorts — an important guide to ensure the legal professional arrives at the correct litigation strategy or business plan. However, like roadmaps, litigation analytics will only be useful if it's based on data that is complete and accurate.
    Read More ›
  • Understanding the Potential Pitfalls Arising From Participation in Standards Bodies
    Chances are that if your company is involved in research and development of new technology there is a standards setting organization exploring the potential standardization of such technology. While there are clear benefits to participation in standards organizations &mdash; keeping abreast of industry developments, targeting product development toward standard compliant products, steering research and intellectual property protection into potential areas of future standardization &mdash; such participation does not come without certain risks. Whether you are in-house counsel or outside counsel, you may be called upon to advise participants in standard-setting bodies about intellectual property issues or to participate yourself. You may also be asked to review patent policy of the standard-setting body that sets forth the disclosure and notification requirements with respect to patents for that organization. Here are some potential patent pitfalls that can catch the unwary off-guard.
    Read More ›