Bilus weighs in on ruling in chemo drug False Claims Act

Bilus weighs in on ruling in chemo drug False Claims Act
Ruling over chemo drug questionable, attorney says
February 24, 2017
Carrie Salls
The Pennsylvania Record

Sandy Bilus, a partner in Saul Ewing’s Litigation Practice, is quoted in The Pennsylvania Record sharing his opinion of the ruling in Gohil v. Aventis. The article explains that a former salesperson of the drug filed a whistleblower claim in 2002 – under seal -- claiming the company forced the employees to make false claims about the effectiveness of the drug. An amended complaint was filed in 2007, which was unsealed in 2008. The company asked the court to dismiss the amended complaint, arguing that the six-year statute of limitations imposed by the Fair Claims Act had passed, and that it did not receive proper notice of the claims that occurred before 2000. The district court ruled that the statute of limitations did not apply because the new claims filed in the amended complaint were “a natural offshoot” of the original ones.

“This may have not been fair because the defendant never had the opportunity to see the original sealed lawsuit,” Sandy said in the article.  “It’s basically outrageous to not have that fair notice. If the defendant didn’t know about the original complaint, how does this relate to timeliness?”

To read the full article, click here.