United States: First Circuit Affirms Dismissal Of False Claims Act Case

Happy birthday to Stan Lee, the main man behind Marvel Comics. He wrote the stories for The Amazing Spider Man which, when we were 10 years old, we read with a good deal more enthusiasm than we presently feel when encountering the deathless prose in (a) a plaintiff motion to compel, or (b) pretty much any opinion out of the Missouri state courts. When we were at Comic Con in San Diego last Summer, the only autograph we wanted was Stan Lee's. But the line was indecently long. Hundreds of Thors, Daredevils, and X-men stood between us and the object of our adoration. We knew any hope of meeting our hero was pure fantasy. Anyway, if our friends at the Abnormal Use blog do not have a picture of a Marvel comic at the top of today's post, we will be very much disappointed.

Happy birthday, also, to Denzel Washington. Most of you probably know him from his movies, such as Glory, Malcolm X, Training Day, and, currently, Fences. But we first laid eyes on Washington when he appeared in the very fine television show, St. Elsewhere. That program was set in a Boston hospital. It ran from 1982 to 1988. Denzel Washington was in the cast all six years. The entire cast was superb, and the writing was inventive. It is possible that the ending of St. Elsewhere (cleverly titled "The Last One") was a little too inventive. It turned out that everything that happened in the series was the fantasy of an autistic child. To our eyes, it seemed a bit of a cheat. But maybe it was a commentary on art. Art is artifice. It is a lie in service of some bigger truth. It is a fine falsehood.

So fantasy and falsehood seem to be our themes for the day. Massachusetts has an interesting history of falsehoods in legal history. The Salem Witch trials had their origin in a silly girl's lies. It is easy to read the trial transcripts of the Sacco and Vanzetti trial, or the trial of Lizzy Borden, and conclude that great injustices were done. More recently, and more to the point for the sort of law we practice, the history of False Claim Act cases against drug and device companies in the Bay State has been inglorious. Cases have marched forward and cost companies many millions of dollars in the absence of any actual falsehoods. We are even more dismayed when we consider the overly aggressive and incoherent positions sometimes adopted by our former employer, the Department of Justice. But maybe, just maybe, courts in the Bay State are starting to exercise some control over, and impose reasonable limits on, False Claims Act cases.

That certainly seems to be the case with Hagerty ex rel. U.S. et al. v. Cyberonics, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 22405 (1st Cir. Dec. 16, 2016). Hagerty brought a qui tam action (hence the "ex rel.") alleging that the defendant had promoted medically unnecessary replacements of batteries in nerve stimulator medical devices. Those battery replacements, according to the plaintiff, resulted in patients and medical providers filing – ta da! – false claims for reimbursements from government health care programs. Such false claims supposedly added up to violations of the False Claims Act.

The first thing that occurs to us is that this case presents a classic case of damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't. If any of those batteries wore down prior to replacement, you can be sure there would be a product liability action – maybe even one for wrongful death. We bet you've even heard of similar such cases. If you want to get hypertechnical, any replacement of a battery before it runs down is unnecessary. Or perhaps you could call it being careful. Whatever. Is this really a case of a false claim?

The second thing that occurs to us is that Hagerty is the second First Circuit case we have posted on this week that imposes limits on False Claims Act cases. It almost seems like a Christmas miracle. The two First Circuit decisions are like a pair of presents under the tree, occupying places of honor amidst the drone, ice bucket, Amazon Echo, Yankee candles, beer growler, and die cast 1/64 scale Aston Martin DB5 that Santa left for us.

The Hagerty trial court dismissed the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b), which requires that fraud claims be pleaded with specificity. Well, that makes sense. A claim under something called the False Claims Act must be alleging some sort of fraud. In Hagerty, after the plaintiff filed the qui tam case in February 2013, the government declined to intervene. (We would say that such declination reflects weakness on the merits, but every time we say something like that a plaintiff qui tam lawyer drops a comment or sends us a note telling us we're all wet.) Then the defendant in Hagerty filed a motion to dismiss, and the plaintiff responded by filing a First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). [Yes, the False Claims Act is commonly abbreviated as the "FCA," so we could refer in this post to the FCA FAC, but the spirit of the season moves us to be merciful.] The FAC accused the company of using "aggressive sales quotas" that inspired sales representatives to share inaccurate battery life calculations with doctors and to encourage premature battery replacements. The FAC projected that at least 10,000 batteries had been replaced prematurely, with a cost of $20,000 per procedure, with 50-60% of that cost being covered by government health programs. Did we mention that the plaintiff in Hagerty was a former company sales representative?

The trial court held that the FAC did not pass muster under Rule 9(b). There was no specificity about which medical providers submitted reimbursement claims, or how many reimbursement claims were submitted by which providers, or how exactly the defendant's actions caused the submissions. The court refused to infer that the defendant's actions generally "infected" reimbursement claims with fraud. There was no allegation of which specific patients were actually covered by government programs. Indeed, the FAC identified only one patient, but never alleged that the patient was an actual Medicare recipient. Fighting "an uphill battle," the plaintiff resorted to "statistical allegations." That is how the plaintiff ended up talking about 50-60% coverage. But the court concluded that the statistical approach was insufficient, amounting to nothing more than "insinuation." There is no doubt that the trial court's approach was rigorous. Remarkably, and wonderfully, the First Circuit completely affirmed the trial court's approach, and affirmed dismissal of the False Claims Act cause of action.

Now anyone with a tender heart and warm sympathies for plaintiff lawyers (so we're talking about somebody utterly unlike us), might grouse about this result. What more could the plaintiff lawyers do? Weren't they as specific as they could be? The answer is no, and that is proved by the plaintiff's own arguments, and that takes us to the second part of the First Circuit's opinion. The plaintiff eventually sought to amend his complaint yet again, so apparently his lawyers did manage to think up some additional allegations that might inject some specificity into the False Claims Act claim. But the trial court was unimpressed by the plaintiff's "listless approach toward amending his complaint," and denied the amendment on the grounds of undue delay. What was the delay? The FAC had been filed on May 29, 2014. The defendant moved to dismiss the FCA on June 18, 2014. No undue delay by the defendant, obviously. The court granted the defendant's motion on March 31, 2015. The plaintiff did not move for leave to file a second amended complaint until August 14, 2015. Put another way, the plaintiff tried to file a second amended complaint more than two and a half years after filing the qui tam lawsuit, more than 13 months after the defendant filed its motion to dismiss the FCA, and more than four months after the court granted the motion to dismiss. The plaintiff argued that the only period of alleged delay that mattered was the four months after the court's ruling, and that did not constitute undue delay.

Maybe we are jaded defense hacks, but four months does seem like rather a long time. But the First Circuit reasoned that the longer period of delay, starting from the filing of the motion to dismiss, was relevant. The motion put the plaintiff on notice of potential deficiencies, and "nothing prevented [the plaintiff] from moving for leave to plead any new information once he became aware of it." Accordingly, the First Circuit concluded that the plaintiff "did not meet his burden of providing a valid reason for his delay and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion for leave to amend." There is a valuable practice pointer in the Hagerty case. When fashioning an argument of undue delay, you might be able to lengthen that delay by looking earlier in the timeline.

Moreover, the Hagerty opinion offers a more fundamental way out from pernicious False Claims Act cases. Plaintiffs should be required to allege actual falsehoods. They should be required to allege them with specificity. That specificity must include not only the who, what, where, and when, but also the how – the causative link between the alleged falsehoods and the government payments. Many False Claims Act cases will have real trouble meeting this standard. Those cases are not only meritless, they are fantasies.

This article is presented for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.