Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-1326_6jfl.pdf
Page Number: 4

Cite as:  598 U. S. ____ (2023) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to  notify  the  Reporter  of 
Decisions,  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  Washington,  D. C.  20543, 
pio@supremecourt.gov, of any typographical or other formal errors. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

Nos. 21–1326 and 22–111 
_________________ 

UNITED STATES, ET AL., EX REL. TRACY SCHUTTE, 
ET AL., PETITIONERS 
v. 
SUPERVALU INC., ET AL. 

21–1326 

UNITED STATES, ET AL., EX REL. THOMAS PROCTOR, 
PETITIONER 
v. 
SAFEWAY, INC. 

22–111 

ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT 

[June 1, 2023]

 JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court. 
The False Claims Act (FCA) imposes liability on anyone 
who  “knowingly”  submits  a  “false”  claim  to  the  Govern-
ment.  31  U. S. C.  §3729(a).    In  some  cases,  that  rule  is 
straightforward:  If  a  law  authorized  payment  of  $100  for 
“each”  medical  test,  and  a  doctor  knows  that  he  did  five 
tests  but  submits  a  claim  for  ten,  then  he  has  knowingly 
submitted  a  false  claim.  But  sometimes  the  rule  is  less 
clear.  If  a  law  authorized  payment  for  only  “customary”
medical tests, some doctors might be confused when it came
time  for  billing.    And,  while  some  doctors  might  honestly
mistake what that term means, others might correctly un-
derstand whatever “customary” meant in this context—and 
submit claims that were inaccurate anyway.