Murad Hussain is a trial attorney and litigator who represents clients in government enforcement matters and complex civil litigation. Recognized by Super Lawyers magazine as a Washington, DC “Rising Star,” his practice focuses on defending life sciences innovators, healthcare providers, and procurement contractors facing allegations of False Claims Act violations, deceptive marketing, and criminal fraud. In 2017 alone, Mr. Hussain spent 20 weeks in three jury trials against the US Department of Justice. Most recently, he defended Dr. Salomon Melgen against claims of bribing US Senator Robert Menendez, and successfully argued for acquitting both men on all charges involving political contributions – a ruling that, in the New York Times’ words, “blew a hole” in the prosecution’s case and led to the dismissal of all remaining charges. Mr. Hussain also serves on the Firm’s Pro Bono Committee and regularly represents clients pro bono in criminal proceedings and civil lawsuits alleging unconstitutional or discriminatory conduct.

Mr. Hussain has significant experience litigating novel constitutional questions, particularly involving the First Amendment, and has authored several academic commentaries on the Speech and Religion Clauses. Prior to law school, he was a creative executive at a Hollywood studio-based production company.

Mr. Hussain served as a law clerk to the Honorable Ellen Segal Huvelle of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.


  • Representing individuals and companies in criminal and civil investigations by the US Department of Justice, US Department of Health and Human Services, US Department of Defense, and other federal agencies.
  • Pharmaceutical innovators, in winning dismissals of two False Claims Act qui tam suits concerning promotional activities, see U.S. ex rel. JKJ Partnership 2011, LLP v. Sanofi-Aventis U.S. Inc., et al., No. 3:11-CV-6476, 2018 WL 2427126 (D.N.J. May 30, 2018); U.S. ex rel. Dickson v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., et al., No. 3:13-CV-1039, 2017 WL 2780744 (D.N.J. June 27, 2017); and in defending against ongoing state Attorneys General actions alleging violations of state False Claims Acts and consumer protection statutes.
  • Naval contractors, in defending against the federal government's False Claims Act allegations, arguing for the FCA's non-extraterritoriality, and securing dismissal without admission of liability. U.S. ex rel. Rudolph v. Inchcape Shipping Services Holdings Ltd., et al., No. 1:10-CV-1109 (D.D.C. June 11, 2018).
  • Campaign contributor, in securing a mistrial after a 10-week jury trial on bribery and related criminal charges, where the jury deadlocked 10-2 for acquittal, and in successfully arguing for Rule 29 acquittal on all counts based on political contributions, leading to the dismissal of all remaining charges. U.S. v. Menendez, et al., 291 F. Supp. 3d 606, 623-35 (D.N.J. 2018).
  • Dermatologic surgeon, in winning a complete acquittal after a 5-week federal criminal jury trial on charges of healthcare fraud and aggravated identity theft, and securing a full dismissal of related civil False Claims Act allegations.
  • Federal procurement contractor, in winning dismissal of a False Claims Act qui tam suit alleging violations of the Trade Agreements Act. U.S. ex rel. Berkowitz v. Automation Aids, et al., No. 13-CV-8185, 2017 WL 1036575 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 16, 2017), aff'd, 896 F.3d 834 (7th Cir. 2018).
  • Radiation oncology practice, in winning dismissal of a False Claims Act qui tam suit alleging violations of Medicare requirements for supervision of medical procedures. U.S. ex rel. Parker v. Space Coast Medical Associates, L.L.P, 94 F. Supp. 3d 1250 (M.D. Fla. 2015).
  • Hospital management company, in federal investigations, proceedings before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation, and individual False Claims Act qui tam suits alleging medically unnecessary procedures and violations of the Stark Law and Anti-Kickback Statute. See In re Health Management Associates, Inc. Qui Tam Litigation, MDL Nos. 2442, 2524; U.S. ex rel. Williams v. HMA, Inc., et al., No. 3:09-CV-130 (M.D. Ga. June 22, 2015) (dismissing claims against clients); U.S. ex rel. France v. HMA, Inc., et al., No. 8:13-CV-1264 (M.D. Fla. May 27, 2015) (dismissing case); U.S. ex rel. Dennis v. HMA, Inc., et al., No. 3:09-CV-00484, 2013 WL 146048 (M.D. Tenn. Jan. 14, 2013) (dismissing case).


A Look Under The Hood: Breaking Down DOJ's FY2018 Healthcare Recoveries
Qui Notes: Unlocking the False Claims Act
DOJ's False Claims Act Recoveries Fall to $2.8 Billion in FY2018
New Law on the Tax-Deductibility of False Claims Act and Other Government Settlements
DOJ Announces $3.7 Billion in FY2017 False Claims Act Recoveries
Living in a Material World - Compliance Program Opportunities After Escobar
ABA 15th Annual Washington Health Law Summit, Washington, DC


Washington, DC Super Lawyers
"Rising Star" – Criminal Defense: White Collar; Government Contracts; Health Care; Civil Litigation: Defense (2014-2017)


  • JD, Yale Law School
  • AB, Harvard College, magna cum laude
  • California
  • District of Columbia
  • US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
  • US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
  • US District Court, Central District of California
  • US District Court, District of Columbia
  • US District Court, District of Columbia, The Honorable Ellen Segal Huvelle

Email Disclaimer