serves the goals of punishment” pursuant to the rule in Halper. 490 U.S. at 448, 109 S.Ct. at 1902. The rule in Halper, however, does not apply to the facts of this case. Halper concerned a defendant’s conviction and punishment for making false Medicare claims totalling $585. In a subsequent False Claims Act (FCA) suit, the government sought $130,000 in damages. The Court held that the civil sanction in the FCA action constituted punishment and violated double jeopardy principles because it was not rationally related to the actual loss the government sustained. In this case, because HHS did not assess monetary damages Halper*s analysis contrasting the amount of money damages with the amount the government lost does not apply. See United States v. Reed, 937 F.2d 575, 578 (11th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Nevertheless, as we stated in Reed, Halper is
holding that termite damage does not fall within the meaning of property damage in the policy because the alleged misrepresentations did not cause the damage the termites did holding that halper does not apply when a monetary damage award has not been imposed holding that to offset a jurys damage award a separate thirdparty insurance award must cover the same loss which served as the basis for the jury award holding damage award immaterial when no liability holding that property damage occurred when homeowners noticed damage not when house was improperly constructed