White Collar & Government Investigations Blog

Olshan Litigation and White Collar & Government Investigations partner Derrelle Janey published an article in The Recorder (subscription required), a Los Angeles-based legal publication, entitled “Rule 9(b) as a Gatekeeper for California Health Care Fraud Cases.” In the article, he examines how Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) serves as a threshold requirement in California health care fraud and False Claims Act cases through the recent case of Lifschutz v. Ghasseminejad. He highlights the importance of specificity in fraud allegations, emphasizing Rule 9(b)'s requirement that plaintiffs identify specific actors, conduct and connections to allegedly false claims. “Scandalous generalized allegations are not enough even in moments of crisis,” Derrelle writes. “In Lifschutz, the Relator argued that a key individual defendant ‘must have known’ about the alleged fraud because he held corporate officer titles at some of the entity defendants.” He explains that Rule 9(b) requires details of a false claims scheme and reliable indicia that claims were submitted. He also underscores that plaintiffs may not group defendants together and instead must identify each defendant's alleged participation in the fraud separately. “Rule 9(b) does not allow a complaint to lump multiple defendants together,” Derrelle writes. “It requires plaintiffs to differentiate their allegations when suing more than one defendant and to inform each defendant separately of the allegations surrounding his alleged participation in the fraud.”