A False Claims Act qui tam action was not dismissed by the District Court for the District of Columbia, because the complaint pled fraud allegations with sufficient particularity to meet the standards articulated by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b). The relator, a former employee of a contractor that supplied bulletproof vests to the government, brought the action against the contractor and a subcontractor that provided the synthetic fiber for the vests. The government subsequently intervened and filed an amended complaint, which alleged the defendants violated the FCA by presenting fraudulent claims, making false statements and conspiring to defraud. The elements of an FCA violation under 31 USC 3729(a)(1) require a plaintiff to show the defendant submitted a false claim to the government, the claim was false, and the defendant knew the claim was false. The subcontractor moved to dismiss, arguing the government failed to plead fraud with particularity and did not allege the subcontractor presented a false claim for payment or the existence of a conspiracy. FRCP 9(b), which applies to FCA actions, requires that "[i]n alleging fraud or mistake, a party must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake." Rule 9(b) does not require plaintiffs to allege every fact pertaining to fraud when a scheme spans several years, but defendants must be able "to defend against the charge and not just deny that they have done anything wrong."