# Prologue — Oakland City City University University University v. United States (No. 05-1035) > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386016_0831%3A0 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Prologue - **Published:** January 1, 2005 ## Text C)) rea: No. . Gs @51035FFH 1 2 2006 Jr OH eOFFICE OF THE CLERK Supreme Court of the Anited States * OAKLAND CITY UNIVERSITY, founded by GENERAL BAPTISTS, INC. d/b/a OAKLAND CITY UNIVERSITY, Petitioner, Vv. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel. JEFFREY E. MAIN, Responden * ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAL§, FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT Pe" —_ CoO PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI WITH APPENDIX % Michael J. McManus James D. } nnson Counsel of Record RUDOLPH, FINE, PORTER Jeffrey J. Lopez & JOHNSON, LLP Jonathan D. Tarnow 221 N.W.-Fifth Street Brooke E. McDonough Second Floor DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP P.O. Box 1507 1500 K Street, N.W. Evansville, Indiana 47708 Suite 1100 (812) 422-9444 Washington, DC 20005-1209 (202) 842-8800 Counsel for Petitioner Counsel for Petitioner THE LEX GROUP®*C ¢ 1750 K Street N.W. @ Suite 475 ¢ Washington, DC 20006 (202) 955-0001 @ (800) 815-3791 @ Fax: (202) 955-0022 www.thelexgroupdc.com QUESTION PRESENTED The District Court dismissed relator’s claim under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 37 U.S.C. 3729 (2000), et seq., finding that an uncertified statement by Petitioner, a university participating in the federal student aid program under the Higher Education Act of 1965 (“HEA”), in its Program Participation Agreement (“PPA”) with the United States Department of Education (“ED”) could not be the basis of FCA liability because the PPA is not a claim for federal funds. On appeal, a panel of the Seventh Circuit reversed, finding, in conflict with decisions of the Second, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and District of Columbia Circuit Courts of Appeal, that uncertified statements made in a federal program participation agreement may constitute false statements uncer the FCA. The Seventh Circuit’s decision also directly conflicts with a decision of the Fifth Circuit which, on substantially identical facts, held that a statement in the PPA could not be used to support FCA liability against a university. A single question is presented for review: 1. Whether an institution’s statement that it will comply with general regulatory conditions, made in an agreement to participate in a federal program, May constitute a false statement under the False Claims Act, even where the statement is uncertified and is not a condition of payment under the program, LIST OF PARTIES The parties named in the caption are the only parties to this proceeding. The Department of Justice declined to intervene before the district court, but filed a Statement of Interest before the district court and appeared as amicus curie before the court of appeals. This petition is timely filed on February 15, 2006. CQRPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to this Courts Rule 29.6, undersigned counsel states that Petitioner Oakland City University (“OCU”), founded by General Baptists, Incorporated, d/b/a Oakland City University has no parent company, and no publicly held company owns 10% or more of its stock. ili TABLE OF CONTENTS Page QUESTION PRIEBIENTED ....0:cccsiccssceccoscossorscovssnssceses i I I ai sitickisinpecicannviirecaercaneicaiacainiagl ii CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. ........... ii TABLE OF COT MIIG .nncicccccssccscciscivneyscsensaccsvenses iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES oo.ssscsssecsesosssssssoeore v een ne ee eee PELE sie pee 1 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ..........ccccecesessseees 1 STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED ................. 1 STATA OF THE CAG. ci. ccsciscieseccosncoctssoon 2 The Federal Student Aid and PPA Process ....... | ean! 3 The Action Below bids canadien ded masnbenaidacais ceaimuniolne: 7 REASONS FOR ALLOWANCE OF THE 5 | gemeesereainen escPatesisnet Nera oon ane Missin renin enue” H I. Review Is Warranted To Resolve A Circuit Split Regarding Whether FCA Liability May Arise From An _ Uncertified Statement That Is Not A Precondition Of Payment. ................... 12 iv IT. Review Is Necessary To Resolve A Circuit Split Regarding Whether FCA Liability Can Attach To False Statements PROG TR BT, vhcnesisiseccccsvccrvind cn 17 A. The PPA is not a claim made to the government and contains no CRPCRTNCOCIOY soi os diccvccadsccccsacexiuns 17 B. The Seventh Circuit’s decision conflicts with the Fifth Circuit’s holding that only a certified statement in the PPA can be the basis of FCA liability ................ 20 III. Review Of The Seventh Circuit’s Decision Is Necessary To Limit The FCA To False Claims for Government Payment ................c00eeeeee 23 CU ree iesdiser thekicinsshrsepdannnicieictacanntateninenons 29 APPENDIX TABLE OF AUTHORITIES i Page(s) CASES Ab-Tech Constr., Inc. v. United States, 31 Fed. Cl. 429 (Fed. Cl. 1994)................ccs0 15 Cook County v. United States ex rel. Chandler, Re Fe 0 ee TIED ccvecsnducdunucosscechaseveenenevcociens 12 Harrison v. Westinghouse Savannah River Co., 176 F.3d 776 (4th Cir. 1999)................ 8, 14, 24 Shaw v. AAA Eng’g & Drafting, Inc., 213 F.3d 519 (10th Cir. 2000).................000000 15 United States ex rel Bowan v. Educ. America, Inc., No. 00-3028, slip op. (S.D. Tex. Jan 7, 2004), affd, 7 116 Fed. Appx. 531, No. 04-20384, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 24673 (5th Cir. 2004), cert denied, Ra es Ae CIEE ccvedneacovcsnssentensesoviaceseuths 22 United States ex rel Gay v. Lincoln Technical Inst., No. 3:01-CV-505-, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25968, affd, 111 Fed. Appx. 286, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 21489, cert denied, RE is ere: Ie ITE i vas Sattariencdinceeynibeenertoriens 22 United States ex rel Graves v. ITT Educ. Sves., 284 F. Supp. 2d 487 (S.D. Tex. 2003), affd per curium, No. 03-20460, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21799 (5th Cir.) cert denied, TZO GS. CE. TAOS CIO] oceviccceccccsicsviccecesvie passim United States ex rel. Gross v. AIDS Research Alliance, 415 F.3d 601 (7* Cir. 2005) .............00scc0eess 9,16 United States ex rel. Hendow v. Univ. of Phoenix No. S-03-CV-457, 2004 U.S. Dist LEXIS 28990 (E.D. Cal. May 20, 2004), appeal docketed, No. 04-16247 (June 21, 2004 9th Cir.) ....11, 22 United States ex rel. Hopper v. Anton, 91 F.3d 1261 (Oth Cir. 1996)................. passim United States ex rel. Lamers v. Green Bay, 168 F.3d 1013 (7th Cir. 1999)..........0...0..0... oe? United States ex rel. Mikes, 274 F.3d 687 (2d Cir. 2001)............2....... passim United States ex rel. Ortega v. Columbia Healthcare, Inc., 240 F. Supp. 2d. 8 (D.D.C. 2003)..............0.... 28 United States ex rel Siewick v. Jamieson Science and Eng'g, Inc., 214 F.3d 1372 (D.C. Cir. 2000).................. 9,15 Vil Columbia/Hi” Wealtheare Corp., 125 F. * 399 (5th Cir. 1997)...........004.. 8,13, 14 United States v. Southland Mgmt. Corp., 326 F.3d 669 (5th Cir. 2003) .............sssccceeseees 13 STATUTES Be Tae © BE av scccssntctesvscstiarechintbbiiapenitnniniaiben 1 20 U.S.C. § 1002....... be ne 1 TP Ts © RU vi csiissitninsaiavenivinscinciiicanmenmamenaed 1 BO UA. FOTOS OE, sevciiccicrisissssnieainiainen 2 eS ies & ME ie kacdensncincexsteenenssinvinsteapsncmbbciaiasaned ae Be Us Se ivciickinevpavcstesicincentnsee ea, 18 Fee RRA PI sishsncisinsessctveceateen omens 1 PF AS As: FI vctccnsstninstscsonsssnitasetabiolaidsidignegiens 22 20 U.S.C. § 1094 (C).....seseesecseessersestesseereeneeeteeeecens 25, 26 20 USL. § LOBES MB MID «. osccccscnnescuscsessenosscressoanens 26 SE A ait EO aicicriivdstsiiectidnlcorsiocsicaeamenaen 1, 26 MU (EY 1 MUSC 1G. ea ae viii Nee ceummiacsooneao: 1 TE 12 Ne i. capucpumeieeaceanetane 2 OR OD oa cucsnscoavenrsesesacesseevevoserécasoreococe 1 a scsecevevomseeseissarins 2 REGULATIONS Me FOOTE onc ccccsceccseccsscosoecsecscsce 2 iis cscoacevsecessveosesecsioconsocsccesons 4,18 cic nccskcessesecescsovecsescescevesscn, 4,18 ii covcdenssconsorssesrreesecsceneres 4,18 Oe a cccssceccoveareconevseccecoossscouss 26 Oe BN on cocccecccsccescossntsovesovsscecececsoece, 18 Be WO ID oon ccs cocecessoeccnsccosocessesedsosssce 18 | a REE 2 SO ee 5, 6 ee 19 TX 2 Ne BR ooo ocesencaousecsvsvissceerasonsonscvennese 2,6, 19 OG SA nies ee Disiedeciesencccinscsahandonsibssninsientatonn 4, 27 6 CF tke F GO BO ecrcsrscccsessevitornestsenevereeesons ervvvehy 27 SF ies Ne ites petenn nc tapntenncicinilaipsimiinandiiana 18 ee Oe SUE tissnbviv