Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Bud Conyers v. United States
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 23-20227 · judgment July 16, 2024
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
After the Government intervenes in a False Claims Act (“FCA”) case, is the whistleblower “relator” entitled to 15%-25% of the “proceeds of the action,” as 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d)(1) clearly states, or can the Government deprive the whistleblower of this statutory “relator’s share,” whenever it wants, by writing up a “Covered Conduct” release in a settlement agreement and then asserting that there are differences between this “Covered Conduct” and what the whistleblower alleged— even when the settlement agreement releases the whistleblower’s claims, as well? In short, can the Government unilaterally gut the whistleblower provisions at the heart of the FCA, at will, as the decision below authorizes?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Victor Aronoff Kubli
Grayson & Kubli, P.C.
For respondent
Sarah M. Harris
Acting Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Feb 24 2025Petition DENIED.
- Jan 29 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2025.
- Jan 27 2025Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
- Dec 19 2024Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 3, 2025)