On January 5, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit published an amended opinion and order denying rehearing and rehearing en banc, thus upholding its August reversal of the Northern District of California’s dismissal of a qui tam whistleblower action under the False Claims Act (FCA). The FCA claim was brought by patent attorney Zachary Silbersher against Valeant Pharmaceuticals, predecessor to Canadian drugmaker Bausch Health. The appellate court’s decision turned on the application of the FCA’s public disclosure bar, finding that inter partes review (IPR) proceedings did not trigger the statutory bar to qui tam actions based on evidence previously disclosed during adversarial agency proceedings “in which the Government or its agent is a party.”
Recent Posts
- New Group Launched by IP VIPs Promises to Protect Inventors’ Right to Access Capital
- Inferential Claiming in Patents: A Comprehensive Guide
- Problems, Solutions and the Case for Patents | IPWatchdog Unleashed
- CAFC Says District Court Erred in Claim Construction Analysis that Held Teleflex Patents Invalid
- Chamber’s GIPC Tells USPTO to Pivot on Coordination Plans with FDA