What are the implications of a federal district court's decision not to deny a Relator's claim for damages under the Relator Act?

The district court also rejected relators' claims because payment was not "conditioned on the falsity." As made clear in Escobar , " [I]nstead of adopting a circumscribed view of what it means for a claim to be false or fraudulent, concerns about fair notice and open-ended liability can be effectively addressed through strict enforcement of the Act's materiality and scienter requirements. " 136 S.Ct. at 2002 (quoting United States v. Science Applications Int'l Corp. , 626 F.3d 1257, 1270 (D.C. Cir. 2010) ). We therefore address the district court's concern in the context of materiality.