Case Explained: PAUL LISENBY v. OLYMPUS CORP. OF THE AMERICAS; OLYMPUS AMERICA INC.; GYRUS ACMI, INC

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Filed: 2026-08-04 Docket: 5:24-cv-01803) The Third Circuit affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of Paul Lisenby’s retaliation claim under the False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U.S.C. § 3730(h). The court held that to constitute protected conduct under the “other efforts” prong of the FCA’s anti-retaliation provision, a plaintiff must hold an objectively reasonable belief that their employer is violating or will violate the FCA by submitting false claims for payment to the federal government. While the court determined that FCA retaliation claims are not subject to the heightened particularity pleading standard of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b), it found Lisenby’s Amended Complaint failed to allege facts connecting his concerns about FDA regulatory violations and patient safety risks to a belief that Olympus was committing fraud against the government. Consequently, Lisenby did not engage in protected activity, and the dismissal stands. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.