Opinion ID: 1461215
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Radcliffe's Communications with Purdue and the Government

Text: The district court determined that between 1996 and 2005 Radcliffe, on behalf of Purdue, marketed OxyContin to individual physicians and became familiar with Purdue's marketing claims about OxyContin's relative cost and potency, including the claim that there is a 2:1 equianalgesic ratio between OxyContin and MS Contin. United States ex rel. Radcliffe v. Purdue Pharma L.P., 582 F.Supp.2d 766, 774 (W.D.Va.2008). During this period, Radcliffe was employed by Purdue as a district sales manager, directly marketing Purdue products like OxyContin to physicians. The district court found that some physicians were skeptical of the claimed 2:1 ratio, but Radcliffe's supervisor reassured Radcliffe that it was correct. Id. Despite these assurances, Radcliffe sought independent legal advice in 2004 about the OxyContin claims. Id. In January 2005, using the alias John Femaledeer, Radcliffe sent an email to a Purdue director and to Purdue's General Counsel offering to settle a `whistleblower' suit against Purdue for fraud based on `deceptive pharmacology'. In a subsequent email John Femaledeer (Radcliffe) sought to settle his qui tam claims with Purdue if the company would invest $40 million in his business startup project. Purdue rejected the offer. Around that same time Radcliffe anonymously contacted an Assistant United States Attorney for the Western District of Virginia to determine whether there was any interest in a claim against Purdue, but did not reveal the particulars of his claims during those discussions. Radcliffe, 582 F.Supp.2d at 774. The district court determined it was undisputed that Radcliffe did not disclose the nature of his qui tam allegations to the government prior to the filing of his Complaint on September 27, 2005. Id. at 775. [3]