United States, ex rel. Hassan Foreman v. AECOM, et al.

The questions presented are as follows: Is materiality an element of all claims brought under 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(A) when neither the common law nor the text of the statute support such a requirement for claims based on factually false statements? On a motion to dismiss, can the Government’s continued payment of claims despite actual knowledge of a defendant’s noncompliance be dispositive of materiality when a relator’s wellpleaded factual allegations support at least two materiality factors, and there are other plausible reasons that the Government continued payment? Is a relator permitted to plead a reverse false claim under 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(G) as an alternative to a traditional false claim under § 3729(a)(1)(A) when a relator alleges that the defendant has a separate obligation to return money or property to the Government?