Seventh Circuit Clarifies the Bounds of Anti-Kickback Statute Elements
This week, the Seventh Circuit reversed a conviction under the Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) because the payments at issue—to advertisers—did not reflect an intent “to induce.” United States v. Sorensen, No. 24-1557 (7th Cir. Apr. 14, 2025). The advertisers, after all, wielded no influence over healthcare decisions. And advertising cannot be an AKS-prohibited “referral” in the first place. In reaching these holdings, the Seventh Circuit notably circumscribed the “outer boundaries” of the AKS—violations of which are among the most important drivers of FCA liability.
Fifth Circuit Concurrence Finds FCA’s Qui Tam Device Unconstitutional
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently vacated a $28.7 million verdict in a declined FCA qui tam because the district court improperly relied on the relators’ post-trial expert declarations to calculate damages. Writing separately in a concurrence, Judge Duncan also condemned the “constitutional flaws in the FCA’s qui tam device,” citing the logic of United States ex rel. Zafirov (discussed here), and adding to the number of judges voicing concerns over the constitutionality of the FCA’s qui tam provision. (more…)
Chiding DOJ for “Inexcusable” Delay in Deciding to Intervene, Fifth Circuit Makes Notable Determinations on Materiality and Statute of Limitations
Chastising DOJ for asking eighteen times to extend the seal period, the Fifth Circuit recently held that due to its “dilatory conduct,” DOJ could not avail itself of the FCA’s tolling provision. In the same opinion, the court held that continued reimbursement does not defeat materiality where there are “valid reasons why an agency may continue to pay claims despite allegations of fraud.”