FCA

Subscribe to FCA via RSS

Summary

  • The False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provision allows private citizens (relators) to sue on the government’s behalf for FCA violations and receive a portion of any settlement or award.
  • The FCA qui tam provision has evolved since its inception, and recent U.S. Supreme Court cases signal a move to rein in the power of relators.
  • Funding sources, claim truthfulness, and companies’ subjective understanding will be critical issues in FCA enforcement efforts against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.
  • The current Court hasn’t ruled on the constitutionality of the FCA qui tam provision because no case before it directly raised the issue, but it may soon have the chance.

On August 19, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Allied Stone Inc. (Allied Stone) and its president, Jia “Jerry” Lim, agreed to pay $12.4 million in settlement to resolve allegations that the company violated the False Claims Act (FCA) by evading, or conspiring to evade, antidumping and countervailing duties owed on quartz surface products imported from China. Allied Stone is a Dallas-based countertop and cabinetry supplier. According to the DOJ, Allied Stone misrepresented Chinese quartz surface products as other merchandise subject to lesser duties to avoid the applicable antidumping and countervailing duties. The company also allegedly failed to declare and pay, and failed to ensure that others were declaring and paying, applicable duties owed to the U.S. on entries of its Chinese quartz surface products.

Introduction

The United States is navigating a new era of regulatory oversight and the balance of power between federal and state regulators following the 2024 election cycle. As federal agencies retreat from and/or realign their regulatory enforcement priorities, state attorneys general (AGs) are increasingly taking the lead in policing companies — especially those that are consumer-facing — bridging perceived gaps left by shifting federal priorities, and in some cases, emboldened to expand regulatory enforcement into relatively new arenas.

On May 19, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the launch of a Civil Rights Fraud Initiative, which will use the False Claims Act (FCA) as a basis for investigating the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices of recipients of federal funds, including colleges and universities who receive Title IV student financial aid and research grants. Calling out academic institutions specifically, the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative will invoke the FCA “against those who defraud the United States by taking its money while knowingly violating civil rights laws.”

On May 9, Connecticut Attorney General (AG) William Tong, in collaboration with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut, announced a $495,721 false claims settlement with Advanced Dental Center PC (Advanced Dental) and its owners, Tal Yossefi and Elad Yossefi. The settlement resolves allegations that the business violated both state and federal False Claims Act (FCA) statutes by receiving so-called “recruiting fees” for each Connecticut Medicaid patient referred to the business. No liability was admitted as part of the settlement.

2025 is already shaping up to be an active year for False Claims Act (FCA) litigation. With the recent announcements of executive orders that may expand the FCA as an enforcement tool, as discussed in a recent Troutman Pepper Locke client alert, everyone is keeping a close eye on what is next. In the past few weeks, the U.S. Supreme Court has gotten in on the FCA action.

On February 4, a Vermont Superior Court judge entered a judgment of over $2.7 million against Phoenix Counseling & Wellness, PLC (Phoenix), and the company’s owner for alleged violations of the Vermont False Claims Act (VFCA). Vermont Attorney General (AG) Charity Clark and her office’s Medicaid Fraud and Residential Abuse Unit (MFRAU) received complaints regarding the quality of care and maintenance of patient treatment records by Phoenix.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and 18 state attorneys general (AG) announced a settlement with Boston-based QOL Medical, LLC (QOL) and its CEO, Frederick Cooper, to resolve allegations that the company provided unlawful kickbacks to health care providers. Under the terms of the settlement, QOL and Cooper agreed to pay $47 million to resolve allegations that QOL manipulated health care providers into prescribing a drug called Sucraid — an FDA-approved therapy for a rare genetic disorder, Congenital Sucrase-Isomaltase Deficiency (CSID). Regulators alleged that QOL and Cooper violated the Anti-Kickback Statute and federal and state False Claims Acts.