The United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has revived a lawsuit under the False Claims Act (FCA), that accuses Valeant Pharmaceuticals of fraudulently acquiring a patent to prolong the monopoly over its drug Apriso. The suit had initially been dismissed because of the rule known as the ‘public disclosure bar’ – a federal rule that prevents whistleblowers from filing False Claims Act lawsuits if the alleged fraud has already been disclosed in certain public channels.
However, the Ninth Circuit has provided an interesting perspective on how it interprets this bar. The court found that the public disclosure bar does not apply in this case because, though the patent proceedings and earlier news coverage revealed Valeant’s acquisition of the patent, they did not explicitly state that Valeant had committed fraud. This is a crucial aspect that sets this case apart and thereby allows the FCA suit to proceed.
The suit is being brought by a lawyer, whose identity has not been disclosed so far. Legal professionals worldwide will be closely watching how this case unfolds, given the significant implications it could have on the applicability of the False Claims Act and potentially, the future of patent acquisitions by pharmaceutical companies. The outcome of this case could serve as a precedent in similar situations, further shaping the interpretation and application of the public disclosure bar in future FCA suits.
The detailed news on the Ninth Circuit’s decision can be read here.