UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
|
|
- Claude Andrews
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 0 1 THE MARTIN LAW FIRM, P.L.L.C. Whittier Ave., Suite 00 McLean, Virginia, 1 Kenneth A. Martin SHUGHART THOMSON & KILROY, P.C. N. Central Ave., Suite 00 Phoenix, Arizona 0 Telephone: ( Facsimile: (0-0 Leon B. Silver Attorneys for Relator Austin Sallade United States of America ex rel. W. Austin Sallade vs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff, Orbital Sciences Corporation, Defendant. DISTRICT OF ARIZONA No. CV 0-00 PHX NVW RELATOR S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO PLEAD FRAUD WITH PARTICULARITY (RULE (b RESPONSE TO MOTION OF DEFENDANT TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO PLEAD FRAUD WITH PARTICULARITY (Rule (b Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page 1 of
2 0 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES...ii I. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES... A. Background and Procedural History... B. A Qui Tam Complaint Must Link the Alleged Fraud to Specific False Claims Submitted to the Government... II. CONCLUSION... Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of i
3 0 1 CASES: TABLE OF AUTHORITIES th Corwin v. Marney, Orton, Inv., F.d, ( Cir.... Michaels Bldg. Co. v. Ameritrust Co., N.A., F.d, ( th Cir...., Mitchell Energy Corp v. Martin, F. Supp.,, (S.D. Tex.... Shushany v. Allwaster, Inc., F.d, 1 ( th Cir.... United States of America ex rel. Sean Bledsoe v. Community Health Systems, Inc., Sparta Hospital Corp.d/b/a White County Community Hospital, U.S. Ct. of Appeals th Circuit, 00 U.S. App. LEXIS 0 (September, STATUTES: 1 USC...1 RULES: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure rule (a...,,,, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (b...1,,,,,, MISCELLANEOUS: Bledsoe, 00 U.S. LEXIS 0 at 1, 1... Bledsoe, 00 U.S. LEXIS 0 at,... Bledsoe at... Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of ii
4 0 1 Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 ii Page of
5 0 1 THE MARTIN LAW FIRM, P.L.L.C. Whittier Ave., Suite 00 McLean, Virginia, 1 Kenneth A. Martin SHUGHART THOMSON & KILROY, P.C. N. Central Ave., Suite 00 Phoenix, Arizona 0 Telephone: ( Facsimile: (0-0 Leon B. Silver Attorneys for Relator Austin Sallade United States of America ex rel. W. Austin Sallade vs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff, Orbital Sciences Corporation, Defendant. DISTRICT OF ARIZONA No. CV 0-00 PHX NVW RELATOR S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO PLEAD FRAUD WITH PARTICULARITY (RULE (b RESPONSE TO MOTION OF DEFENDANT TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO PLEAD FRAUD WITH PARTICULARITY (Rule (b W. Austin Sallade ( Sallade, the qui tam relator in this False Claims Act case, opposes the Defendant s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Plead Fraud with Particularity (Rule (b. Sallade has pled with particularity in his Complaint consistent with Title 1 USC. By providing details of first-hand Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of 1
6 0 1 knowledge by direct observation and communications as an employee of Orbital, Sallade not only discloses specific incidents of fraud, but he also discloses the existence of a pervasive scheme by Orbital to defraud the government in multiple contract settings. In his Complaint, Sallade discloses detailed examples of fraud sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and (b. Alternatively, if the court disagrees, Sallade requests leave to amend his complaint to add additional details if necessary. In support of his Opposition, Sallade provides the following memorandum of points and authorities. I. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES The Court should deny Defendant s Motion to Dismiss because Sallade has pled with specificity and particularity the facts giving rise to his fraud allegations in his complaint. In his complaint Sallade discloses pervasive fraudulent scheme related to Orbital s accounting methods that touch every government contract that Orbital performs, and that has cost the United Sates and its taxpayers many millions of dollars. Sallade discloses four separate contracts and examples of Orbital s fraudulent accounting practices and scheme in his Complaint: The NSPO ROC/Taiwan contract ( ROCSAT, a firm fixed price contract under which Orbital unlawfully initiated Independent Research and Development ( IR&D projects and charged them as indirect costs instead of as direct costs allocated to the ROCSAT Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
7 0 1 project. This unlawful assignment of costs resulted in an estimated $,000, in indirect costs paid to Orbital, which should have been included in the fixed price contract. As a subcontractor to Boeing, Inc., who contracted with the US Government Missile Defense Agency, Orbital further subcontracted with ATK Aerospace Company, Inc. to acquire rocket launch motors. Orbital was notified and understood that in order to meet contract needs, ATK needed to increase its production capacity. In order to do so, ATK billed costs for increased productivity to Orbital who passed the costs on to Boeing, and ultimately, the United States government. There was no disclosure by Orbital that it billed the Government the government to pay for an increased production capacity for ATK Furthermore, Orbital characterized its costs under its contract with Boeing as either direct or indirect in order to unlawfully increase its cost recovery under its cost plus contracts and its profitability under its fixed price contracts, all at the government s expense. Orbital misappropriated government property under a fixed price incentive contract with the Air Force (the Orbital Sub-Orbital Program (OPS 1. Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
8 0 1 Orbital also subcontracted with Boeing for the Capability Enhancement I ( CE I contract under Boeing s Ground Missile Defense program. After suffering under-runs performing two earlier subcontracts with Boeing, Orbital intentionally concealed the underruns when it competed for a follow-on contract in order to unlawfully inflate its estimated costs to perform the follow-on CE I subcontract with Boeing. Orbital later passed this cost onto the United States Government via Boeing s prime contract. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (b states: In all averments of fraud or mistake, the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake shall be stated with particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge, and other condition of mind of a person may be averred generally. Rule (b is to be harmonized with the general principles of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, which requires only that a complaint give the defendant fair notice of what plaintiff s claim is and the grounds upon which it rests. United States of America ex rel. Sean Bledsoe v. Community Health Systems, Inc., Sparta Hospital Corp. d/b/a White County Community Hospital, U.S. Ct. of Appeals th Circuit, 00 U.S. App. LEXIS 0 (September, 00, Michaels Bldg. Co. v. Ameritrust Co., N.A., F.d, ( th Cir.. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure rule (a states (emphasis added: (a Claims for Relief. A pleading which sets forth a claim for relief, whether an Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
9 0 1 original claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, shall contain (1 a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new grounds of jurisdiction to support it, ( a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and ( a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Relief in the alternative or of several different types may be demanded. The harmonization of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (b and therefore requires a balance between specificity and a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the complaint is based. This has led to decisions wherein the application of Rule (b is considered to be flexible and dependent upon the circumstances of the litigation at bar. Shushany v. Allwaster, Inc., F.d, 1 ( th Cir.. When harmonized with Rule, the purpose of Rule is not to introduce formalities to the pleading but to provide defendants with more specific notice as to the particulars of their alleged misconduct. See Michaels Bldg. Co v. Ameritrust Co., N.A., F.d, ( th Cir.. Mitchell Energy Corp v. Martin, F. Supp.,, (S.D. Tex. (a complaint need not set forth all facts pertinent to a case in order to meet the heightened pleading standard of Rule (b; see also Corwin v. Marney, Orton, Inv., F.d, ( th Cir. (although Rule (b calls for fraud to be pled with Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
10 0 1 particularity, the allegations must still be as short, plain, simple, direct and concise as is reasonable under the circumstances. According to Bledsoe, a complaint by a relator in a qui tam case is sufficient under Rule (b if it alleges the time, place, and contents of the alleged misrepresentation on which he relied, the fraudulent scheme, the fraudulent intent of the defendants, and the injury resulting from the fraud and enables the defendant to prepare an informed pleading responsive to the specific allegations of fraud. Bledsoe, 00 U.S. LEXIS 0 at 1. Where a corporation is the defendant in a false claims action, the relator does not need to allege the specific identify of the natural persons within the defendant corporation who submitted the false claims. Bledsoe, 00 U.S. App. LEXIS 0 at 1. If a fraudulent scheme is alleged, the court should require, at most, that the relator provide some examples of fraudulent conduct. There are valid reasons for not requiring that relator to plead every instance of fraud when the relator s allegations encompass many allegedly false claims over a substantial period of time, this is reasonable primarily to advance the goal of logistical efficiency. Bledsoe, 00 U.S. App. LEXIS 0 at,. In Bledsoe the Court also held that where the relator pleads a complex and far-reaching fraudulent scheme with particularity, and provides examples of specific false claims submitted to the government pursuant to that scheme, a relator may proceed to discovery on the entire fraudulent scheme. (Id.. Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
11 0 1 While the concept of a false or fraudulent scheme should be narrowly construed, examples that a Relator provides that will support more general allegations of fraud to the extent that such examples are representative samples of the broader class of claim are adequate to enable the defendant to infer with reasonable accuracy the precise claims at issue. This affords the defendant the protections of Rule (b while allowing relators to pursue complex and farreaching fraudulent schemes without being subjected to onerous pleading requirements. Indeed, if the premise of a qui tam defendant is to encourage an individual to come forth in extenuating circumstances to report on an injustice, creating obstacles at the time of pleading only serves to dissuade one from making the injustice known. Requiring the plaintiff to provide particulars beyond a few well-placed examples, then, is not necessary and is actually contrary to the need for adherence to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, which requires a short and plain statement of the claim. In this case, Sallade s allegations are based on direct observation and first hand involvement in conversations he was privy to as a Senior Director of Finance of Defendant s Launch Systems Group. The Defendant s Motion to Dismiss For Failure to Plead Fraud with Particularity (Rule (b does not consider the special situation that exists with a corporate defendant accused of multiple incidences of fraud, and indeed a pervasive scheme of fraudulent Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
12 0 1 conduct over an extended time period. Plaintiff has provided representative samples of fraud through the descriptions and details of four different government contracts and subcontracts under which Orbital defrauded the federal government by its pervasive accounting and procurement fraud scheme. These examples are sufficient and adequate to allow the defendant to infer with reasonable accuracy (Bledsoe, at the breadth, scope and nature of the claims Sallade asserts.. A. Background and Procedural History The Defendant, Orbital, was founded in and has substantial operations in Arizona, Virginia, California and Maryland. Its business consists of the development and manufacture of small space and rocket systems. As such, the bulk of Orbital s work is in the area of Government Contracts. Sallade, a qui tam relator, became the senior finance executive at Orbital s Launch Systems Group (LSG in July 00. His responsibility was to oversee the LSG s cost accounting and financial reporting systems, its cost estimating and cost proposal preparation efforts and its budget forecasting function. He maintained Orbital s internal financial corporate controls and helped to restructure Orbital's indirect cost pools and helped author its Cost Accounting Disclosure Statement. (CASDS. A CASDS is a statement provided by a contractor to the government that discloses its cost accounting methods and practices. Once disclosed, the contractor is required to consistently adhere to and apply its disclosed accounting methods to ensure fair and consistent accounting treatment of its costs incurred while Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
13 0 1 performing its government contracts. The scheme Sallade alleges as to Orbital is its pervasive manipulation and misapplication of its disclosed cost accounting methods to illegally increase its cost recovery under its federal government contracts and subcontracts at the taxpayers expense. As Sallade alleges, Orbital intentionally and systematically acted to increase its cost recovery under its cost reimbursement type contracts and its profitability under its fixed price contracts by shifting its costs incurred between its direct and indirect cost accounts to achieve increase its cost recovery under its cost reimbursable type contracts and the profitability of its fixed price contracts. Sallade commenced employment with Orbital as its Senior Director of Finance. However, the actual timeframe of Defendant s fraudulent activity predates the time of Sallade s employment because the improprieties that Sallade reported to Orbital s senior managers were those already in existence with Sallade commenced his employment with the Company, and they continued throughout his employment up until the time of Sallade filed his FCA claim in February 00. Because Orbital commenced its fraudulent accounting scheme before it employed Sallade, and continued them throughout the entire time of his employment, there is no other specific start date than the dates of Sallade s employment as alleged. Discovery is needed to further pinpoint exactly when Orbital first conceived of and employed its fraudulent accounting and billing schemes. Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
14 0 1 Where is within the offices of Orbital, and in related corporate meetings and settings where such financial business matters were discussed, and How is detailed in the complaint wherein Sallade discloses the improper cost accounting methods that Orbital employed to misallocate and misclassify costs as direct or indirect with the view to increase its cost recovery and profitability at the Government s expense. In this regard, Sallade discloses specific contracts, time periods, personnel and practices as examples of the broader scheme that it alleges. B. A Qui Tam Complaint Must Link the Alleged Fraud to Specific False Claims Submitted to the Government The plaintiff provides specific details about Orbital s false claims made to the federal government. At Count I Sallade describes specific conduct under the NSPO ROC/Taiwan contract ( ROCKSAT beginning in with its proposal in 001 to perform a fixed price satellite launch services contract for the Taiwan government. The complaint discloses with particularity how Orbital charged the federal government for independent research and development costs that it actually incurred to perform its ROCKSAT contract for the Taiwan government. Because Orbital included the same costs in its overhead accounts billed to the government, Orbital actually collected payments twice for the same work. As a consequence of Orbital s fraud, Orbital realized an estimated $,000, windfall at the government s expense. Therefore, in this count, Sallade has Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
15 0 1 detailed Orbital s fraudulent scheme with particularity and he places a dollar estimate on the cost of that fraud to the government at $,000,000. As another example of Orbital s fraudulent scheme, in Count II of his complaint, Sallade discloses that Orbital illegally used government money to acquire infrastructure and capital for its business that it unlawfully charged the government for. Under its subcontract with Boeing, Orbital purchased capital for its business operations and then illegally sent invoices to the government to cause the government to pay for it. Orbital used the capital to support its general business operations. Under Orbital s CASD, Orbital had no right to direct charge the government for these costs, yet this is what Orbital did, thereby unlawfully increasing its manufacturing capability at the government s expense. As Sallade alleges in his Complaint, as a direct result of Orbital s fraud, the government was damaged by least $1,000, In Count III of his Complaint Sallade describes Orbital s systematic misclassification of costs under its Ground Missile Defense program and subcontract with Boeing to illegally increase its cost recovery. Initially, Orbital purchased four articles of test equipment that it appropriately recorded as fixed assets of the company, meaning that the cost of such equipment was to be recovered by Orbital over time as an indirect depreciation expense included in its overhead rates. However, Orbital later purchased additional items of the virtually identical test equipment. However, when it did so this time it classified Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
16 0 1 the test equipment as special and billed Boeing, (and indirectly the Government directly for it. Orbital s Senior Vice President, Jim Utter, directed that the subsequent equipment purchases be recorded and billed to the government to maximize Orbital s cost recovery. In so doing, Mr. Utter actually undertook to justify his directive by stating his opinion that Orbital could not be expected to make capital investments without any guarantees of future contracts from the government. In other words, Mr. Utter knew that his decision to bill the government to satisfy Orbital s capital investment needs was wrong. Nevertheless, he internally reported that Orbital would convince the government that this additional test equipment should be directly charged to the Boeing subcontract. By his own actions, therefore, Mr. Utter revealed his purposeful and knowing submission of false claims to the federal government. In his Complaint, Sallade estimates the damage to the federal government suffered as a consequence at approximately $1,000, In Count IV of his Complaint, Sallade describes specific instances of conversion of government property by Orbital and its intentional misinterpretations to sustain and conceal them. Under its OSP 1 contract Orbital asserted a clause in the contract that stated; the contractor shall provide, (not deliver, facilities, tools, test equipment, and other items. Orbital intentionally misinterpreted the provision to mean that it could acquire facilities (support and test equipment, at the government s expense, and then keep the equipment as its Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
17 0 1 own. When confronted about this, Orbital reclassified the equipment as special test equipment to justify the fact that the government originally paid for it. Had Orbital appropriately classified the equipment as common equipment, it would have had to reimburse the government for its cost. However, it improperly classified the equipment as special test equipment and charged the government directly to pay for it. Because Orbital was in possession of the equipment without having to pay for it when Orbital competed for the OSP contract, it was able to do so without including costs in its proposal to purchase the equipment. As a consequence, Orbital obtained an unfair competitive advantage during the government s source selection for the OSP contract. Orbital s Senior Vice President actually boasted internally about this by stating that although the government had reclaimed ownership rights in the property, because Orbital was able to retain possession of it, it avoided having to include the equipment costs in its OSP proposal. Sallade estimates that this misappropriation of property by Orbital cost the ten million dollars. Count V describes a general practice by Orbital to hire and classify employees as supplier management or supplier quality personnel, and then to direct charge them to Orbital s subcontract with Boeing. Orbital internally stated that it would not have hired many of the employees if it did not have the opportunity to charge to the Boeing subcontract. However, the function these employees performed was an overhead function that Orbital routinely charged for Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
18 0 1 on an indirect basis. In this case however, because Orbital had available cost ceiling under its Boeing subcontract, it used that contract to hire additional employees who did not actually work directly on the Boeing subcontract. Sallade estimates $1,000, in damages but expects the actual value of Orbital s fraud to far exceed after it obtains discovery from Orbital. In Count VI of his Complaint Sallade discloses Orbital s defective pricing scheme during its performance of its Capability Enhancement ( CE I contract under Boeing s Ground Missile Defense ( GMD program. Commencing in the spring of 00, Orbital engaged the government in price negotiations related to the CE 1 contract. Earlier however, Orbital had performed two other subcontracts for Boeing under the larger GMD program, the Orbital Boost Vehicle and the Test Bed subcontract. The Orbital Boost Vehicle and Test Bed contracts each experienced cost under-runs. Instead of reporting the under- runs to the government, at the direction of Orbital s Senior Vice President Jim Utter, Orbital intentionally withheld disclosing the under-runs to the government to justify its proposal of higher costs to perform the CE I contract. This active concealment of its cost and pricing data by Orbital violated the Truth in Negotiations Act. It s deferred reporting of its costs also enabled Orbital to inflate its estimated costs and the price of its CE I contract to the government. Sallade alleges damages to the government due to Orbital s defective pricing of $,000, Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
19 0 1 At Count VII of his Complaint, Sallade recites Orbital pervasive practice to charge the government for spares that the company did not need to purchase. Orbital used the spares to create paid inventory accounts. This violates Material Management and Accounting System policies and procedures. Estimated damages from this fraudulent property management and inventory practice is estimated at not less than $00, Orbital pleads each example of Orbital s fraudulent accounting methods and scheme with particularity. He discloses who, what, when, where, and how in relation to each claim. Sallade bases his allegations on actual knowledge of Orbital s accounting practices that he learned about while employed by Orbital as its senior finance executive. For its second argument, the Defendant reiterates the substance of the arguments that it asserts in its first argument, that a Qui Tam Complaint Must Comply with Rule (b by Identifying with Particularity the Circumstances of the Alleged Fraud and the Relevant False Claims. Sallade has already responded to Defendant s first argument, and incorporates it here by reference in response to Defendant s second argument. As demonstrated, Sallade discloses the specific contracts, individuals, practices, and time periods implicated by Orbital s fraud. In, Bledsoe, recently decided in the Sixth Circuit, the Court makes it clear that the objective of the original complaint is to give the defendant adequate notice to understand the charges being brought against him, while still adhering to Fed. Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
20 0 1 Rules Civ. Procedure Rule for a concise and plain statement. Sallade has disclosed the contracts and subcontracts implicated by Orbital s fraud. Orbital has access to all of their accounting records, personnel records, contract correspondence, internal s, audit reports, and meeting minutes that pertain to these contracts, and Sallade s allegations. The time period for all activities, if not more specifically identified, occurred during the two or three-year period before Sallade became employed by Orbital in July 00, and on information and belief, continue through this date. Sallade discloses specific details of the fraudulent accounting practices that he alleges. Sallade actually brought his allegations to the attention of Orbital s senior managers and because of this, he was demoted. The level of specificity that the defendant presents as being necessary is not borne out by recent case law. Especially in the case of a corporate defendant where the fraudulent activities alleged are pervasive and occurred over a period of years. Under these circumstances in the instance of a qui tam case, flexibility exists in the application of Rule (b and representative samples of fraudulent activity disclosed in a complaint is deemed sufficient to meet the threshold pleading with particularity requirement. Based on the allegations disclosed in Sallade s Complaint, Defendant has more than adequate notice of the claims asserted, and suffers no inability to respond to them. As further evidence of this point, Orbital has already Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page 0 of
21 0 1 defended the allegations made in communications it has had with federal government criminal and civil investigators. There is no requirement that Sallade should have to plead each specific incidence of fraud with specificity as the defendant suggests. Also, the nature of a qui tam case implies that the relator may not possess every detail of every fraud perpetrated by the defendant, but knows enough about specific incidences within that fraudulent behavior to bring the quit tam case to light and present representative examples to lead the case to a discovery phase. II. CONCLUSION The Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Plead Fraud with Particularity should be denied. Plaintiff s complaint contains adequate detail to satisfy even the heightened burdens of Fed Rule Civ. Procedure (b when dealing with false claims. Furthermore, the level of specificity required for a complaint against a corporate defendant accused of a pervasive and long lasting fraudulent scheme permits some flexibility in the seemingly rigid Rule (b standard, and the Fed. Rule of Civ. Procedure standard must be considered and harmonized with Rule (b in cases of this complexity. Sallade has presented representative samples of fraudulent behavior and certainly presents adequate notice to the defendant about the respective claims asserted against it. Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page 1 of
22 0 1 If the Court disagrees, it should grant Sallade leave to amend his complaint to overcome any pleading defects the Court determines to exist. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 1 st day of November, 00. THE MARTIN LAW FIRM, P.L.L.C. By /s/ Kenneth A. Martin Kenneth A. Martin THE MARTIN LAW FIRM, P.L.L.C. Whittier Ave., Suite 00 McLean, Va. 1 SHUGHART THOMSON & KILROY, P.C. Leon Silver Security Title Plaza N. Central Ave., Suite 00 Phoenix, Arizona 0 Attorneys for Relator Austin Sallade Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
23 0 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on November 1, 00, I served the attached document by and U. S. Mail on the following: : Arnold M. Auerhan Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 00 Mark Wenker United States Attorney s Office 0 North Central Avenue, Suite 00 Phoenix, Arizona 00-0 Attorney for Plaintiff United States of America STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP 01 East Washington Street, Suite 00 Phoenix, Arizona 00- Telephone: (0-00 Facsimile: (0 - Lawrence Allen Katz Peter S. Kozinets MCKENNA LONG & ALDRIDGE LLP 00 K Street, NW Washington, D.C. 000 Michael G. Scheininger /s/ Kenneth A. Martin Case :0-cv-000-NVW Document 1 Filed /01/00 Page of
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 6:10-cv-00414-GAP-DAB Document 102 Filed 01/23/12 Page 1 of 8 PageID 726 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. and NURDEEN MUSTAFA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Plaintiffs,
More informationCase 9:09-cv RC Document 100 Filed 08/10/12 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 991 **NOT FOR PRINTED PUBLICATION**
Case 9:09-cv-00124-RC Document 100 Filed 08/10/12 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 991 **NOT FOR PRINTED PUBLICATION** IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION UNITED
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 11-3514 Norman Rille, United States of America, ex rel.; Neal Roberts, United States of America, ex rel. lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellees
More informationCase 1:12-cv JCC-TRJ Document 27 Filed 09/04/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID# 168
Case 1:12-cv-00396-JCC-TRJ Document 27 Filed 09/04/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID# 168 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division CYBERLOCK CONSULTING, INC., )
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION. v. Case No. 6:14-cv-501-Orl-37DAB
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and STATE OF FLORIDA, ex rel. JOHN DOE, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION v. Case No. 6:14-cv-501-Orl-37DAB HEALTH FIRST, INC.;
More informationCase: 1:07-cv Document #: 62 Filed: 04/08/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:381
Case: 1:07-cv-02328 Document #: 62 Filed: 04/08/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:381 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel.
More informationFocus. FEATURE COMMENT: The Most Important Government Contract Disputes Cases Of 2016
Reprinted from The Government Contractor, with permission of Thomson Reuters. Copyright 2017. Further use without the permission of West is prohibited. For further information about this publication, please
More informationCase 2:06-cv SSV-SS Document 682 Filed 10/08/10 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Case 2:06-cv-04091-SSV-SS Document 682 Filed 10/08/10 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EX REL. BRANCH CONSULTANTS, L.L.C. VERSUS * CIVIL
More informationCase at a Glance. Can the False Claims Act Apply to Claims That Were Never Presented. to the federal government?
Case at a Glance The federal False Claims Act provides the United States with a remedy for fraud practiced on the government and permits actions to be brought in the government s name by persons who can
More informationP H I L L I P S DAYES
Case :-cv-0000-nvw Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 P H I L L I P S DAYES NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT LAW FIRM A Professional Corporation 0 North Central Avenue, Suite 00 Phoenix, Arizona 0 Telephone: -00-JOB-LAWS
More informationCase: 2:15-cv WOB-JGW Doc #: 43 Filed: 07/13/17 Page: 1 of 12 - Page ID#: 379
Case: 2:15-cv-00013-WOB-JGW Doc #: 43 Filed: 07/13/17 Page: 1 of 12 - Page ID#: 379 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY NORTHERN DIVISION AT COVINGTON CIVIL ACTION
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CENTRAL DIVISION. Civil Case Number: 4:11-cv JAJ-CFB Plaintiffs, v.
Case 4:11-cv-00129-JAJ-CFB Document 39 Filed 12/28/12 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CENTRAL DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and STATE OF IOWA, ex rel.
More informationWhat High Court's Expansion Of FCA Time Limits Would Mean
Portfolio Media. Inc. 111 West 19 th Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10011 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com What High Court's Expansion Of FCA Time Limits
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :0-cv-0-ODW-FMO Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: O JS- 0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EX REL. STEVEN MATESKI, v. RAYTHEON CO., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff,
More information2013 IL App (1st) U. No
2013 IL App (1st) 120972-U FOURTH DIVISION September 26, 2013 No. 1-12-0972 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited
More informationCase 3:14-cv FAB Document 117 Filed 06/16/16 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
Case 3:14-cv-01616-FAB Document 117 Filed 06/16/16 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO PUERTO RICO MEDICAL EMERGENCY GROUP, INC. Plaintiff, v. Civil No. 14-1616
More informationCase 2:10-cv TFM-CRE Document 99 Filed 05/31/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 2:10-cv-00131-TFM-CRE Document 99 Filed 05/31/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel. JASON SOBEK, Plaintiff,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA CIVIL ACTION NO JJB RULING ON DEFENDANT S MOTION TO DISMISS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel. KERMITH SONNIER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA VERSUS CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-1038-JJB ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY RULING ON DEFENDANT S MOTION TO
More informationFraudMail Alert. Background
FraudMail Alert CIVIL FALSE CLAIMS ACT: Eighth Circuit Rejects Justice Department Efforts to Avoid Paying Relators Share on Settlement Unrelated to Relators Qui Tam Claims The Justice Department ( DOJ
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiffs, Case No v. Hon: AVERN COHN MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Kreipke, et al v. Wayne State University, et al Doc. 49 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel. Christian Kreipke, and CHRISTIAN KREIPKE,
More informationCALIFORNIA FALSE CLAIMS ACT
CALIFORNIA FALSE CLAIMS ACT The people of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION 1. Section 12650 of the Government Code is amended to read: 12650. (a) This article shall be known and may
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:06-cv JGG
Case 6:06-cv-00479-ACC-JGG Document 10 Filed 05/30/2006 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL
More informationCase 2:11-cv DDP-MRW Document 23 Filed 02/19/13 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:110 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-0-ddp-mrw Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #:0 O NO JS- UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 JULIE ZEMAN, on behalf of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff, USC
More informationFalse Claims Act Text
False Claims Act Text TITLE 31 MONEY AND FINANCE SUBTITLE III FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CHAPTER 37 CLAIMS SUBCHAPTER III CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT Sec. 3729. False claims (a) LIABILITY FOR
More informationFalse Claims Act. Definitions:
False Claims Act Colorado Access is committed to a culture of compliance in which its employees, providers, contractors, and consultants are educated and knowledgeable about their role in reporting concerns
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE EAGLE SUPPLY AND MANUFACTORING ) COMPANY, ) Plaintiff ) ) No. 3:10-CV-407 v. ) ) BECHTEL JACOBS COMPANY, LLC., ) Defendant ) MEMORANDUM
More informationELDERSERVE HEALTH, INC. FALSE CLAIMS ACTS SUMMARY
FEDERAL FALSE CLAIMS ACT as amended, 31 U.S.C. 3729-3733 (FCA) FRAUD ENFORCEMENT AND RECOVERY ACT OF 2009 (FERA) PATIENT PROTECTION and AFFORDABLE CARE ACT of 2010 (PPACA) FCA Imposes liability on persons
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION UNITED STAETS OF AMERICA, ) ex rel. GERALD POLUKOFF, M.D., ) ) Plaintiff/Relator, ) ) No. 3:12-cv-01277 v. ) ) Judge Sharp ST.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN (KANSAS CITY) DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN (KANSAS CITY DIVISION MEDICAL SUPPLY CHAIN, INC., Plaintiff, NOVATION, LLC NEOFORMA, INC. ROBERT J. ZOLLARS VOLUNTEER HOSPITAL
More informationCase 1:13-cv RHB Doc #14 Filed 04/17/14 Page 1 of 8 Page ID#88
Case 1:13-cv-01235-RHB Doc #14 Filed 04/17/14 Page 1 of 8 Page ID#88 TIFFANY STRAND, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION v. Plaintiff, CORINTHIAN COLLEGES,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Radke, v. Sinha Clinic Corp., et al. Doc. 55 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EX REL. ) DEBORAH RADKE, as relator under the
More informationCase 1:12-cv ABJ Document 14 Filed 06/19/13 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:12-cv-01369-ABJ Document 14 Filed 06/19/13 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DELONTE EMILIANO TRAZELL Plaintiff, vs. ROBERT G. WILMERS, et al. Defendants.
More informationCase 1:15-cv RJS Document 20 Filed 02/03/17 Page 1 of 11
Case 1:15-cv-09262-RJS Document 20 Filed 02/03/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, -v- L-3 COMMUNICATIONS EOTECH, INC., L-3 COMMUNICATIONS
More informationCase 0:14-cv WPD Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/05/2014 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:14-cv-60975-WPD Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/05/2014 Page 1 of 8 WENDY GRAVE and JOSEPH GRAVE, vs. Plaintiffs, WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF
More informationCase 2:18-cv KJD-CWH Document 7 Filed 12/26/18 Page 1 of 7
Case :-cv-0-kjd-cwh Document Filed // Page of 0 MICHAEL R. BROOKS, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 0 HUNTER S. DAVIDSON, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 0 KOLESAR & LEATHAM 00 South Rampart Boulevard, Suite 00 Las Vegas, Nevada
More informationMastering Whistleblower & Qui Tam Litigation: Telephonic CLE
Mastering Whistleblower & Qui Tam Litigation: Telephonic CLE Rossdale CLE A National Leader in Attorney Education 2016 Rossdale CLE www.rossdalecle.com Summary www.rossdalecle.com 2 The False Claims Act
More informationNew Mexico Medicaid False Claims Act
New Mexico Medicaid False Claims Act (N.M. Stat. Ann. 27-14-1 to 15) i 27-14-1. Short title This [act] [27-14-1 to 27-14-15 NMSA 1978] may be cited as the "Medicaid False Claims Act". 27-14-2. Purpose
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 11-3514 Norman Rille, United States of America, ex rel.; Neal Roberts, United States of America, ex rel., lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellees,
More informationFROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FAIRFAX COUNTY Thomas P. Mann, Judge. The relators in this qui tam case filed this action alleging that several laboratories
PRESENT: All the Justices COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA OPINION BY v. Record No. 170995 JUSTICE STEPHEN R. McCULLOUGH August 9, 2018 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, EX REL., HUNTER LABORATORIES, LLC, ET AL. FROM
More informationSmall Business Lending Industry Briefing
Small Business Lending Industry Briefing Featuring Bob Coleman & Charles H. Green 1:50-2:00 PM E.T. Log on 10 minutes early before every Coleman webinar for a briefing on issues vital to the small business
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case 6:09-cv-01002-GAP-TBS Document 668 Filed 07/01/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID 39161 ELIN BAKLID-KUNZ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Relator, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION v. Case No: 6:09-cv-1002-Orl-31TBS
More information2:15-cv DCN Date Filed 02/24/15 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION
2:15-cv-00794-DCN Date Filed 02/24/15 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel. David Grant vs. United
More informationModel Provider DRA Policy and/or Employee Handbook Insert
Model Provider DRA Policy and/or Employee Handbook Insert PURPOSE [THE PROVIDER] is committed to its role in preventing health care fraud and abuse and complying with applicable state and federal law related
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISIO N
NORMAN OTTMAN, Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISIO N V. Civil Action No. AW-00-350 8 HANGER ORTHOPEDIC GROUP, INC., IVAL R. SABEL, and RICHARD A.
More informationThe Hawaii False Claims Act
The False Claims Act Executive Sununary The False Claims Act ("HFCA") helps the state government combat fraud and recover losses resulting from fraud in state programs, purchases, or contracts. Haw. Rev.
More informationNew Jersey False Claims Act
New Jersey False Claims Act (N.J. Stat. Ann. 2A:32C-1 to 18) i 2A:32C-1. Short title Sections 1 through 15 and sections 17 and 18 [C.2A:32C-1 through C.2A:32C-17] of this act shall be known and may be
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:08-cv MOC-DSC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:08-cv-00540-MOC-DSC LUANNA SCOTT, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Vs. ) ORDER ) FAMILY DOLLAR STORES, INC., )
More informationCase: 4:15-cv RWS Doc. #: 30 Filed: 05/04/15 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 183
Case: 4:15-cv-00464-RWS Doc. #: 30 Filed: 05/04/15 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 183 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION GRYPHON INVESTMENTS III, LLC, Plaintiff, Case No.
More informationCourthouse News Service
Case 3:07-cv-01782-L Document 87 Filed 07/10/2009 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION JOMAR OIL LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ENERGYTEC INC., et al.,
More informationCase 0:16-cv WPD Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2017 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:16-cv-61856-WPD Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2017 Page 1 of 11 JENNIFER SANDOVAL, vs. Plaintiff, RONALD R. WOLFE & ASSOCIATES, P.L., SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC., and NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE,
More informationCase 5:05-cv NAM-DEP Document 133 Filed 11/28/2006 Page 1 of 8. Plaintiffs, Defendant. Counterclaim Plaintiff, Counterclaim Defendants.
Case 5:05-cv-01456-NAM-DEP Document 133 Filed 11/28/2006 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg ARROW COMMUNICATION
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
United States of America v. University of Massachusetts, Worcester et al Doc. 144 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ex rel.
More informationDOJ Issues Memorandum Urging Government Lawyers to Dismiss Meritless False Claims Act Cases
Special Matters and Government Investigations & Appellate Practice Groups February 1, 2018 DOJ Issues Memorandum Urging Government Lawyers to Dismiss Meritless False Claims Act Cases The Department of
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 1:05-cv-10557-EFH Document 164 Filed 12/08/10 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION SULEYMAN CILIV, d/b/a 77 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTING AND TRADING COMPANY, v. Plaintiff, UXB INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendant.
More informationCase: 1:10-cv Document #: 47 Filed: 03/07/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:580
Case: 1:10-cv-03361 Document #: 47 Filed: 03/07/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:580 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES of AMERICA ex rel. LINDA NICHOLSON,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION DORIS LOTT, Plaintiff, v. No. 15-00439-CV-W-DW LVNV FUNDING LLC, et al., Defendants. ORDER Before the Court is Defendants
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
W.C. English, Inc. v. Rummel, Klepper & Kahl, LLP et al Doc. 36 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA LYNCHBURG DIVISION W.C. ENGLISH, INC., v. Plaintiff, CASE NO. 6:17-CV-00018
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation et al v. Hitachi Ltd et al Doc. 101 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC TOOL CORPORATION, METCO BATTERY TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. Richmond Division. v. ) Civil Action No. 3:08-CV-799 MEMORANDUM OPINION
Harmon v. CB Squared Services Incorporated Doc. 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division OLLIE LEON HARMON III, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 3:08-CV-799
More informationCase: 1:14-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 03/26/14 Page 1 of 23 PageID #:1
Case: 1:14-cv-02143 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/26/14 Page 1 of 23 PageID #:1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION JOSE SANCHEZ, on behalf of himself and all
More informationCase 1:18-cv KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/30/2018 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:18-cv-25005-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/30/2018 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SABRINA ZAMPA, individually, and as guardian
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Case :0-cv-000-KJD-LRL Document Filed 0//0 Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 0 THE CUPCAKERY, LLC, Plaintiff, v. ANDREA BALLUS, et al., Defendants. Case No. :0-CV-00-KJD-LRL ORDER
More informationCase 3:11-cv DPJ -FKB Document 26 Filed 01/05/12 Page 1 of 10
Case 3:11-cv-00332-DPJ -FKB Document 26 Filed 01/05/12 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI JACKSON DIVISION AUGUSTUS P. SORIANO PLAINTIFF V. CIVIL
More informationFCA, FERA, PPACA Alphabet Soup of Fraud Liability
FCA, FERA, PPACA The Alphabet Soup of Fraud Liability Michael D. Miscoe, JD, CPC, CASCC, CUC, CCPC, CPCO 1 DISCLAIMER DISCLAIMER This presentation is for general education purposes only. The information
More informationCase 4:15-cv ALM-CAN Document 13 Filed 09/17/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 58 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION
Case 4:15-cv-00571-ALM-CAN Document 13 Filed 09/17/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 58 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION PRUVIT VENTURES, LLC, Plaintiff, vs. AXCESS GLOBAL
More informationUnited States District Court
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 GABY BASMADJIAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiff, THE REALREAL,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No.
Case: 15-11897 Date Filed: 12/10/2015 Page: 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 15-11897 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 2:13-cv-00742-SGC WILLIE BRITTON, for
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION CASE NO. 12-CV-5162 ORDER
Case 5:12-cv-05162-SOH Document 146 Filed 09/26/14 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 2456 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION CITY OF PONTIAC GENERAL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
More informationUnited States District Court
Case :0-cv-00-RS Document 0 Filed 0//00 Page of **E-Filed** September, 00 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 0 AUREFLAM CORPORATION, v. Plaintiff, PHO HOA PHAT I, INC., ET AL, Defendants. FOR THE NORTHERN
More informationCase 3:16-cv JST Document 56 Filed 02/08/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-00-jst Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. Plaintiff, ERIK K. BARDMAN, et al., Defendants. Case No.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Case 1:06-cv-00949 Document 121 Filed 12/13/2007 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION G.M. SIGN, INC., Plaintiff, vs. 06 C 949 FRANKLIN BANK, S.S.B.,
More informationCase 1:15-cv KLM Document 34 Filed 09/16/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:15-cv-01927-KLM Document 34 Filed 09/16/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 Civil Action No. 15-cv-01927-KLM IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO GINA M. KILPATRICK, individually
More informationCASE 0:11-cv PJS-TNL Document 125 Filed 12/21/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
CASE 0:11-cv-00416-PJS-TNL Document 125 Filed 12/21/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. ANDREW ELLIS, HARRIET ELLIS, and MICHAEL W. BLODGETT,
More informationCase 1:09-cv LO-TCB Document 1 Filed 01/06/09 Page 1 of 20 PageID# 1
Case 1:09-cv-00010-LO-TCB Document 1 Filed 01/06/09 Page 1 of 20 PageID# 1 pi! IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION PRIMUS TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE I. INTRODUCTION
Case :0-cv-000-RSM Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. EVA ZEMPLENYI, M.D., and EVA ZEMPLENYI, M.D., individually,
More informationFour False Claims Act Rulings That Deter Meritless FCA Actions
Four False Claims Act Rulings That Deter Meritless FCA Actions False Claims Act Alert November 3, 2011 Health industry practice lawyers from Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP have represented clients
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 553 U. S. (2008) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
More informationCase 1:12-cv UU Document 61 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/30/2013 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 1:12-cv-23300-UU Document 61 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/30/2013 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PATRICE BAKER and LAURENT LAMOTHE Case No. 12-cv-23300-UU Plaintiffs,
More informationMONTEFIORE HEALTH SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY AND PROCEDURE SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF FEDERAL AND STATE NUMBER: JC31.1 FALSE CLAIMS LAWS
MONTEFIORE HEALTH SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY AND PROCEDURE SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF FEDERAL AND STATE NUMBER: JC31.1 FALSE CLAIMS LAWS OWNER: DEPARTMENT OF COMPLIANCE EFFECTIVE: REVIEW/REVISED: SUPERCEDES:
More informationCase 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:17-cv-02356 Document 1 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) CONGRESSIONAL HUNGER CENTER ) Hall of States Building ) 400 N. Capitol St. NW Ste.
More informationTennessee Medicaid False Claims Act
Tennessee Medicaid False Claims Act (Tenn. Code Ann. 71-5-181 to 185) i 71-5-181. Tennessee Medicaid False Claims Act -- Short title. (a) The title of this section and 71-5-182 -- 71-5-185 is and may be
More informationADDENDUM TO HEALTHCARE PARTNERS POLICY NO. HCP-TQ-09, THE CODE OF CONDUCT, AND THE SUMMARY OF FEDERAL FALSE CLAIMS ACT AND ANALOGOUS STATE LAWS
ADDENDUM TO HEALTHCARE PARTNERS POLICY NO. HCP-TQ-09, THE CODE OF CONDUCT, AND THE SUMMARY OF FEDERAL FALSE CLAIMS ACT AND ANALOGOUS STATE LAWS (Revised: May 2015) This Addendum is intended to supplement
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE April 18, 2012 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE April 18, 2012 Session THE COUNTS COMPANY, v. PRATERS, INC. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamilton County No. 11C408 Hon. W. Jeffrey Hollingsworth,
More informationCase 6:14-cv WSS Document 1 Filed 05/22/14 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION
Case 6:14-cv-00200-WSS Document 1 Filed 05/22/14 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION UNITED FORMING, INC. Plaintiff VS. T.B. PENICK & SONS, INC.; N-CAD,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION MONEC HOLDING AG, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, v. APPLE INC., Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff Civil Action
More informationMiami-Dade County False Claims Ordinance. (1) This article shall be known and may be cited as the Miami-Dade County False Claims Ordinance.
Section 21-255. Short title; purpose. Miami-Dade County False Claims Ordinance (1) This article shall be known and may be cited as the Miami-Dade County False Claims Ordinance. (2) The purpose of the Miami-Dade
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. * GLOBE COMPOSITE SOLUTIONS, LTD., * * Plaintiff, * * v. * * Civil Action No. 05-10004-JLT SOLAR CONSTRUCTION, INC.
More informationMONTANA FALSE CLAIMS ACT (MONT. CODE ANN )
MONTANA FALSE CLAIMS ACT (MONT. CODE ANN. 17-8-401 17-8-416) 17-8-401. Short title. This part may be cited as the Montana False Claims Act. 17-8-402. Definitions. As used in this part, the following definitions
More informationCase 2:06-cv JCC Document 51 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Case :0-cv-00-JCC Document Filed /0/0 Page of 0 0 JAMES S. GORDON, Jr., a married individual, d/b/a GORDONWORKS.COM ; OMNI INNOVATIONS, LLC., a Washington limited liability company, v. Plaintiffs, VIRTUMUNDO,
More informationTerms & Conditions for Heathrow ID Pass Scheme (the Terms )
Terms & Conditions for Heathrow ID Pass Scheme (the Terms ) 1. DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATION 1.1 In these Terms where the context admits: Airport means Heathrow Airport; Airport Operator means Heathrow
More informationHow Escobar Reframes FCA's Materiality Standard
Portfolio Media. Inc. 111 West 19 th Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10011 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com How Escobar Reframes FCA's Materiality Standard
More informationCase 9:16-cv KAM Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/24/2017 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 9:16-cv-81973-KAM Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/24/2017 Page 1 of 13 MIGUEL RIOS AND SHIRLEY H. RIOS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 16-81973-CIV-MARRA/MATTHEWMAN
More informationCase 2:10-cv RLH -GWF Document 127 Filed 06/29/11 Page 1 of 10
Case :0-cv-0-RLH -GWF Document Filed 0// Page of 0 SHAWN A. MANGANO, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 0 shawn@manganolaw.com SHAWN A. MANGANO, LTD. 0 West Cheyenne Avenue, Suite 0 Las Vegas, Nevada -0 Tel: (0) 0-0
More information#:1224. Attorneys for the United States of America UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION 14
#: Filed //0 Page of Page ID 0 ANDRÉ BIROTTE JR. United States Attorney LEON W. WEIDMAN Chief, Civil Division GARY PLESSMAN Chief, Civil Fraud Section DAVID K. BARRETT (Cal. Bar No. Room, Federal Building
More informationCase 2:12-cv DN Document 19 Filed 03/27/13 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
Case 2:12-cv-00023-DN Document 19 Filed 03/27/13 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION R. WAYNE KLEIN, the Court-Appointed Receiver of U.S. Ventures
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION IN RE CELEXA AND LEXAPRO ) MDL DOCKET NO. 1736 PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION ) ALL CASES MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before me now is
More informationDefendant. SUMMARY ORDER. Plaintiff PPC Broadband, Inc., d/b/a PPC commenced this action
Case 5:11-cv-00761-GLS-DEP Document 228 Filed 05/20/15 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK PPC BROADBAND, INC., d/b/a PPC, v. Plaintiff, 5:11-cv-761 (GLS/DEP) CORNING
More informationCase 3:05-cv B-BLM Document 783 Filed 04/16/2008 Page 1 of 9
Case :0-cv-0-B-BLM Document Filed 0//00 Page of 0 ROBERT S. BREWER, JR. (SBN ) JAMES S. MCNEILL (SBN 0) 0 B Street, Suite 00 San Diego, CA 0 Telephone: () -00 Facsimile: () -0 WILLIAM F. LEE (admitted
More informationPOLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR DETECTING AND PREVENTING FRAUD, WASTE AND ABUSE
MAIMONIDES MEDICAL CENTER SUBJECT: FALSE CLAIMS AND PAYMENT FRAUD PREVENTION 1. PURPOSE Maimonides Medical Center is committed to fully complying with all laws and regulations that apply to health care
More information