Can false representations be 'material' for purposes of 18 USC §1920 where such representations were neither addressed to the decisionmaking body nor shown to have been capable of influencing that body's determination of Petitioner's entitlement to workers compensation benefits?

QUESTION PRESENTED This case presents an important, unresolved, and recurring issue of first impression in this Court. Petitioner appeals a conviction for violation of 18 U.S.C. §1920, which codifies as a felony crime of perjury the making of a false statement to obtain federal workers compensation benefits. Essential to this crime is that the false statement be “material;” and that it be made “in connection with an application for or receipt of benefits. A false statement is material if, “viewed alone” it has “a natural tendency to influence, or [be] capable of influencing, the decision of the decisionmaking body to which it was addressed.” United States v. Whitaker, 848 F.2d 914, 916 (8th Cir. 1988); United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 509 (1995). In this case, the allegedly false statements were made in the context of an undercover interview by a law enforcement agency, the United States Postal Service Office of Inspector General (USPS OIG). The “decisionmaking body” with respect to Petitioner’s entitlement to workers compensation was not the USPS OIG, but the Department of Labor (DOL). As established at trial, DOL relies ultimately on the opinions of medical care providers in deciding whether a claimant is entitled to workers compensation benefits. Here, the prosecution made no showing, certainly no showing beyond a reasonable doubt, that the doctors on whose findings DOL relied in determining Petitioner’s eligibility for benefits regarded as material the allegedly perjured representations made by Petitioner to the undercover officer. i The Supreme Court should grant certiorari to clarify and develop the materiality standard applicable to federal workers compensation benefit fraud prosecutions. Specifically, this case presents the following question which merits Supreme Court review: Can false representations be “material” for purposes of 18 USC §1920 where such representations were neither addressed to the decisionmaking body nor shown to have been capable of influencing that body’s determination of Petitioner’s entitlement to workers compensation benefits? ii