Three Years After SuperValu, Ambiguity in Statutes and Regulations Remain Important False Claims Act Defense Opportunities

In a Reuters article, Sidley lawyers Jaime Jones, Matthew Bergs, and Joseph LoCascio examine how courts have interpreted the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in United States ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu Inc. and the implications for companies defending False Claims Act (FCA) litigation involving ambiguous statutes and regulations. The authors analyze recent federal appellate decisions, including United States ex rel. Sheldon v. Allergan Sales LLC and United States ex rel. Omni Healthcare Inc. v. MD Spine Solutions LLC, highlighting how subjective knowledge and objective falsity remain important defenses to FCA allegations.

The article also discusses how the Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo affects judicial interpretation of ambiguous statutory requirements and outlines practical considerations for healthcare and life sciences companies evaluating FCA exposure, defending government reimbursement practices, and challenging allegations of regulatory noncompliance.