Search results
Jan 7, 2015 · Mark Radcliffe, a former sales representative and district manager, filed the first related FCA lawsuit against Purdue Pharma in 2005 in Virginia federal court. It was dismissed for failure...
filed by relator Mark Radcliffe against the defendants, Purdue Pharma, L.P. and Purdue Pharma, Inc., alleging that the defendants fraudulently marketed a new drug to boost sales, thus causing the government to overpay for prescription medications through Medicaid and other programs. Though it dismissed the case on other grounds, the
Oct 22, 2016 · Mark Radcliffe, 59, of Shady Spring, who previously owned and operated shuttered pain clinics in Kanawha City and Raleigh County, was found guilty of conspiracy to tamper with a witness and...
- I. Background.
- II. The Public Disclosure Bar.
- III. The Release Defense.
- IV. Rule 9(b) requirement.
- V. Conclusion.
This action was stayed for some time at the request of the federal government, which eventually declined to intervene, along with all of the thirteen state governments named in the Complaint. Purdue then filed the present Motion to Dismiss, seeking a dismissal on the grounds that Radcliffe's claims are based on publicly disclosed information rather...
The FCA provides that there is no subject matter jurisdiction in a case where the claim is Because the public disclosure bar involves the jurisdiction of the court, it must be determined first, before proceeding to any other questions. United States ex rel. Wilson v. Graham County Soil Water Conservation Dist., 528 F.3d 292, 309 (4th Cir. 2008). In...
Purdue contends that Radcliffe released the claim made in his Complaint in the course of a settlement agreement with Purdue when he left its employment. The facts surrounding this defense have been developed in the summary judgment record. In his employment with Purdue between 1996 and 2005, Radcliffe was responsible for marketing OxyContin to indi...
Purdue argues that Radcliffe has failed to plead fraud with particularity as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b). Lack of compliance with the pleading requirements of Rule 9(b) is treated as a failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). Harrison v. Westinghouse Savannah River Co., 176 F.3d 776, 784 n. 5 (4th Cir. 1999). With respect ...
For the reasons stated, the Motion to Dismiss will be denied in part and granted in part, with leave to amend. A separate order will be entered herewith.
Purdue Pharma, L.P. ("Purdue"), defrauded the government by marketing its pain-relief drug, OxyContin, as a cheaper alternative to the drug it replaced, MS Contin, which was also manufactured by Purdue. Radcliffe alleged that Purdue, through its sales agents and marketing materials, falsely claimed to physicians that OxyContin was less ...
the third time. Ten years ago, Mark Radcliffe—a former district sales manager for Purdue Pharma (“Purdue”)—filed a qui tam action under the FCA against Purdue. United States ex rel. Radcliffe v. Purdue Pharma L.P., 600 F.3d 319, 321–22 (4th Cir. 2010). He alleged a fraudulent scheme whereby Purdue marketed
Dec 12, 2013 · The Fourth Circuit held that the district court erred by giving preclusive effect to United States ex rel. Radcliffe v. Purdue Pharma L.P. and, therefore, for dismissing their action on res judicata grounds. Prior to Plaintiffs’ claim, Mark Radcliffe, the husband of Plaintiff Angela Radcliffe, filed a FCA action against Purdue (“Qui Tam I ...
