Twice before, in 2010 and 2014, the Supreme Court denied writs of certiorari asking that it resolve the critical question of whether Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 9(b) requires that False Claims Act (FCA) plaintiffs plead specific false claims. Now, this question has again bubbled up to the high court in three separate petitions. The circuit courts remain split on the way to apply Rule 9(b) in a FCA suit. We anticipate that this time, after another decade of the lower courts failing to align, the Supreme Court will grant certiorari, despite the solicitor general's recent amicus brief recommending against it. This article will give you the "cheat sheet" on the competing Rule 9(b) standards of review, our prediction for the winning standard, and some of the potential implications of the Supreme Court's decision.