Legal Document

128 S. Ct. 2123 (2008) ALLISON ENGINE CO., INC., et al., Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES ex rel. Roger L. SANDERS and Thacker. No. 07-214. Supreme Court of United States. Argued February 26, 2008. Decided June 9, *2126 Theodore B. Olson, Washington, D.C., for Petitioners. Malcolm Stewart, the States as amicus curiae, by special leave Court. Glenn V. Whitaker, Victor A. Walton, Jr., Michael J. Bronson, Patrick M. Hagan, Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease LLP, Cincinnati, OH, Counsel Record, Raymond Ludwiszewski, Matthew D. McGill, Amir C. Tayrani, Gibson, Dunn Crutcher Lawrence R. Elleman, Dinsmore Shohl, L.L.P., William Posey, W. Jeffrey Sefton, Keating, Muething Klekamp, PLL, James Gallagher, Susan Mitchell, McKenna Long Aldridge, Los Angeles, CA, David P. Kamp, White Getgey Meyer, Scott Powell, Don McKenna, Hare, Wynn, Newell Newton, North Birmingham, AL, Helmer, Paul Martins, Robert Rice, Rice Popham Co., L.P.A., Respondents. Justice ALITO delivered opinion The False Claims Act (FCA) imposes civil liability on any person who knowingly uses a "false record or statement to get false fraudulent claim paid approved Government," 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(2), "conspires defraud Government getting allowed paid," 3729(a)(3). We granted review in this case decide what plaintiff asserting under these provisions must show regarding relationship between making statement" payment approval "a . Government." Contrary decision Appeals below, we hold that it is insufficient 3729(a)(2) merely "[t]he statement's use result[ed] obtaining claim," 471 F.3d 610, 621 (CA6 2006) "government money was used pay id., at 622. Instead, prove defendant intended be material Government's approve claim. Similarly, 3729(a)(3) conspirators agreed make achieve end. I In 1985, Navy entered into contracts with two shipbuilders, Bath Iron Works Ingalls Shipbuilding (together shipyards), build new fleet Arleigh Burke class guided missile destroyers. Each destroyer required three generator sets (Gen-Sets) supply all electrical power ship. shipyards subcontracted petitioner Allison Engine Company, Inc. (Allison Engine), formerly division General Motors, 90 Gen-Sets over 50 turn Tool *2127 Company (GTC) assemble Gen-Sets, GTC Southern Ohio Fabricators, (SOFCO), manufacture bases enclosures Gen-Sets. an aggregate total $1 billion each destroyer. Of that, approximately $3 million per Gen-Set; $800,000 SOFCO $100,000 Gen-Set. All funds petitioners ultimately came from Federal Treasury. Navy's contract specified every part built accordance baseline drawings military standards. These requirements were incorporated petitioners' subcontracts. addition, Gen-Set accompanied certificate conformance (COC) certifying unit manufactured requirements. 1995, Sanders Thacker (hereinafter respondents), former employees GTC, brought suit District qui tam relators seeking recover damages pursuant 3729, which renders liable "knowingly presents, causes presented, officer employee approval," 3729(a)(1); makes, uses, made used, 3729(a)(2); Respondents alleged invoices submitted Engine, fraudulently sought work had not been done specifications. Specifically, respondents claimed gearboxes installed first 52 defective leaked oil; never conducted final quality inspection half 67 Gen-Sets; welders worked did meet also issued COCs claiming falsely contractually specifications even though knew those met. tried jury. At trial, introduced evidence stated their completed compliance they presented shipyards. not, however, introduce Navy. close respondents' case, moved judgment matter law Rule Civil Procedure 50(a). Petitioners asserted no reasonable jury could find violation 3729 because failed adduce ever motion. 1-:95-cv-970, 2005 WL 713569 (S.D.Ohio, Mar.11, 2005). court rejected argument have present showed concluded absent proof claims *2128 Government, legally FCA. Id., *10. On appeal, divided panel Sixth Circuit reversed relevant part. 610 (2006). majority 3729(a)(1) requires Government. However, held erred granting motion respect §§ (3) claims. such do require intent cause Rather, determined private entity using sufficient. so holding, recognized its conflicted Totten Bombardier Corp., 380 488 (C.A.D.C. 2004) (Totten), cert. denied, 544 U.S. 1032, 125 2257, 161 Ed. 2d 1059 (2005). certiorari resolve conflict proper interpretation (a)(3). 552 ___, 491, 169 337 (2007). II A "[w]e start, always, language statute." Williams Taylor, 529 420, 431, 120 1479, 146 435 (2000). Section adopted Appealsand endorsed Governmentimpermissibly deviates statute's language. view Appeals, sufficient resulted F.3d, 621-622. Under subsection (a)(2), "to get" "paid "To denotes purpose, thus purpose Government" order 3729(a)(2). Additionally, "paid. same funds." intend itself Eliminating element intent, did, would expand FCA well beyond role combating "fraud against See Rainwater States, 356 590, 592, 78 946, 2 996 (1958) (emphasis added). As Columbia pointed out, reach then "almost boundless: example, attach college university, long institution has received some federal grantsas most them do." Totten, supra, 496. B Defending Appeals' contends phrase *2129 does mean literally bill. maintains customary say pays bill when provides example: "`[W]hen student says his living expenses are by" parents, he typically parents send checks directly creditors. means ultimate source expenses.'" Brief Amicus Curiae 9 (quoting 506 (Garland, J., dissenting)). This example unpersuasive involves colloquial usage by"a customarily employed more formal contexts. For if receives income asked inquiry reveal for, say, car vacation, footed statutory drafting, where precision both important expected, sort relies customary. wrong arguing definition term "claim" 3729(c) 3729(a)(2)'s government" should read literally. definition, request property need constitute "claim." may include demand contractor, grantee, other recipient portion requested demanded, will reimburse demanded." 3729(c). word support alter meaning "by 3729(c)'s "claim," but still necessary another entity.[1] C mean, suggest, see Reply 1, defendant's While "present[ed]" concept presentment mentioned inclusion express requirement (a)(1), combined absence anything similar suggests Congress (a)(2). "[W]hen includes particular one section statute *2130 omits Act, generally presumed acts intentionally purposely disparate exclusion." Barnhart Sigmon Coal 534 438, 452, 122 941, 151 908 (2002) (internal quotation marks omitted). What demands caused Therefore, subcontractor violates submits prime contractor intending claim.[2] If makes rely condition payment, inducing situation, direct link too attenuated establish liability. Recognizing action fraud directed entities threaten transform all-purpose antifraud statute. Our reading based statute, gives effect Congress' efforts protect loss due ensures answerable natural, ordinary consequences conduct." Anza Ideal Steel Supply 547 451, 470, 126 1991, 164 720 (2006) III 3729(a)(3), paid." our enough upon scheme causing payments obtained shown Where conduct involved statement, "getting" bring about It established *2131 (a)(3) accord Tanner 483 107, 107 2739, 97 (1987), conspiracy federally funded "conspiracy States" 18 371. 129, 2739. Tanner, argued financial assistance subject supervision treated "the States." 371 having "not arguable basis plain 371." 131, Indeed, "would have, effect, substituted `anyone receiving supervision' `the States.'" 132, Likewise, urged us substitute Had apply anyone conspired funds, provided. * Because incorrect (3), vacate remand further proceedings consistent opinion. ordered. NOTES [1] render superfluous providing funding. clear there can (2) presents approval, 3729(a)(1), intends Government", originally "made to" forwarded [2] 3729(b) terms "knowing" "knowingly" "mean person, information(1) actual knowledge information; deliberate ignorance truth falsity reckless disregard information, specific required." easily reconcilable holding reasons. First, discern derives "knowingly," rather infinitive get." Second, refers regard "information," while statement.

Classification Label: 7