Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. United States Ex Rel. Carter

**Question presented** 1. Does the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act (WSLA) pause the six‑year statute‑of‑limitations for a civil qui‑tam (private‑party) False Claims Act case, or does it apply only to criminal offenses? 2. Does the False Claims Act’s “first‑to‑file” bar keep a new lawsuit forever out of court once a related suit has been filed, or does it block the new suit only while the earlier suit is still alive (i.e., “pending”)? **Holding** The Supreme Court held, unanimously (9‑0), that: 1. The WSLA “suspends the running of any statute of limitations applicable to any **offense**” only for **criminal** offenses. It does **not** extend the limitations period for civil False Claims Act actions. 2. The FCA’s first‑to‑file bar bars a new qui‑tam suit only while a related suit is **pending** (still alive). Once the earlier suit is dismissed, the bar ends, so a later suit is not automatically dismissed with prejudice. **Core reasoning in plain language** *Why the WSLA is limited to criminal offenses* - The word **“offense”** in the WSLA was used in the same way the rest of Title 18 (the criminal‑law portion of the U.S. Code) uses it: to mean a crime. - The original WSLA statutes from 1921 and 1942 were written to help the government fight fraud that could be **indicted**—that is, charged as a crime—during World Wars I and II. Because only crimes can be indicted, the law was clearly aimed at criminal cases. - When Congress revised the law in 1944, it removed the phrase “now indictable,” but did not change the overall criminal context. The Court said it is unlikely Congress would silently turn a criminal‑only rule into a civil‑law rule with such a tiny wording change. - Therefore, the plain‑text, the historical purpose, and the placement of the WSLA inside the criminal‑law title all point to a narrow, criminal‑only reading. *Why the first‑to‑file bar stops when the earlier case is no longer pending* - The statute says a new qui‑tam suit is barred “based on the facts underlying **a pending action**.” The ordinary meaning of **“pending”** is “still ongoing or not yet resolved.” - Once a related suit is dismissed (even if dismissed for a reason unrelated to the merits, such as the plaintiff’s failure to prosecute), it is no longer pending. The bar therefore disappears. - If the Court had interpreted “pending” to mean “the first‑filed case, forever,” it would bar new suits even after the earlier case is dismissed, which the Court said stretches the language beyond its ordinary sense. **Result** Because the WSLA does not pause the limitations clock for civil False Claims Act cases, the plaintiff’s later filing (Carter III) was still subject to the ordinary six‑year limit. However, the first‑to‑file bar did not require dismissal of Carter III with prejudice, since the earlier related suits had already been dismissed and were no longer “pending.” The case was sent back to the lower court to apply these rules.