Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA"

Transcription

1 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel., AARON J. WESTRICK, Ph.D., Civil Action No (PLF Plaintiffs, v. SECOND CHANCE BODY ARMOR, INC., et al., Defendants. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Civil Action No (PLF Plaintiff, v. TOYOBO COMPANY, LTD., et al., Defendants. OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the United States second motion for reconsideration [Dkt. 476 in Civil Action No and Dkt. 206 in Civil Action No ] of the Court s September 4, 2015 Memorandum Opinion and Order denying defendants motion for summary judgment on the United States implied false certification claim under the False Claims Act ( FCA, 31 U.S.C. 3729, et seq. See United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor, Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2015, reconsideration denied in part sub nom. United States v. Second Chance Body Armor, Inc., No , 2016

2 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 2 of 13 WL (D.D.C. Feb. 11, Defendants argue that the Supreme Court s decision in Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, 136 S. Ct (2016 ( Escobar, is an intervening decision that merits reconsideration. Second Chance Body Armor, Inc., Toyobo Company, Ltd., and Toyobo America, Inc. (collectively, defendants oppose the motion. Upon consideration of the parties written submissions, the relevant case law, and the entire record in this case, the Court will grant the United States motion for reconsideration in part and deny it in part. 2 I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The factual and procedural history of this case has been fully recounted in several prior opinions in these cases. See, e.g., United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at 5-7; United States v. Toyobo Co., Ltd., 811 F. Supp. 2d 37, (D.D.C. 2011; United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor, Inc., 685 F. Supp. 2d 129, (D.D.C As relevant here, the United States amended complaint in Civil Action No alleges that Toyobo Company, Ltd. and Toyobo America, Inc. (collectively, Toyobo contracted with Second Chance Body Armor, Inc. ( Second Chance and other manufacturers to sell them defective Zylon fiber for use in bulletproof vests, which the manufacturers then sold to the United States under both (1 the Bullet Proof Vest Grant 1 Both related (but not consolidated civil actions in the caption of this case contain identical filings. For reference, the Court in this Opinion will refer to docket numbers from United States v. Toyobo Company, Ltd., Civil Action No The documents reviewed by the Court in resolving the pending motion include the following: Amended Complaint ( Am. Compl. [Dkt. 73 in Civil Action No ]; Second Amended Complaint [Dkt. 408 in Civil Action No ]; the United States motion for reconsideration ( Mot. [Dkt. 206]; Toyobo Company, Ltd. and Toyobo America, Inc. s opposition ( Opp. [Dkt. 210]; the United States reply [Dkt. 211]; and Opposition of Pro Se Defendant Thomas E. Bachner, Jr. [Dkt. 483 in Civil Action No ]. 2

3 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 3 of 13 Partnership Act, 42 U.S.C , et seq., and (2 the General Service Administration s Multiple Award Schedule. Am Compl. 1-5, 14-25; see also Second Amended Complaint 1-5 (Dec. 30, 2013 [Dkt. 408 in Civil Action No ]. This conduct forms the basis of the United States three FCA claims and its common law claims of fraud, payment by mistake, unjust enrichment, and breach of contract. See generally Am. Compl.; Second Amended Complaint [Dkt. 408 in Civil Action No ]. The contracts between the United States and Second Chance, as well as those between the United States and other vest manufacturers, contained three relevant clauses: (1 a five-year commercial warranty clause that the vests are warranted to provide protection as stated on the protective panel label and to be free of defects in material and workmanship for the applicable warranty period, see Mot., Ex. 81 at 3 [Dkt ]; (2 a workmanship clause requiring that [a]ny item contracted for must be new, current model at the time of offer, unless otherwise specified[,] and [e]ach article must perform the functions for its intended use, see Declaration of Kellie Stoker in Support of United States Motion for Partial Summary Judgment at Ex. 10, PDF page 64 [Dkt ]; and (3 a new materials clause that the Contractor represents that supplies and components are new, including recycled (not used or reconditioned and are not of such age or so deteriorated as to impair their usefulness or safety. See United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at The Court is aware that the contracts between the United States and vest manufacturers other than Second Chance contained a different general commercial warranty than that quoted in number one of this list. That general commercial warrantee stated that, [f]or five years after date of purchase[, the manufacturer] warrants that the ballistic panels will pass the [National Institute of Justice ( NIJ ] protocol for ballistic intervention and their NIJ designated velocities during an actual occurrence, not necessarily during an NIJ independent laboratory retest procedure. See Declaration of Kellie Stoker in Support of United States Motion for Partial Summary Judgment at Ex. 2, PDF page 8 [Dkt ]. 3

4 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 4 of 13 In addition to these three contract clauses, the United States alleges that it also expected that its bargain included three other provisions, which Judge Roberts referred to as extra-contractual considerations. United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at 16. The three provisions are: (1 a 6% catalog guarantee that the manufacturer guarantees its vests to perform at this level [in V50 ballistics performance] within normal statistical variation (+/-6% during the five-year guaranteed life of the vest, see United States Supp. Brief Pursuant to Court s February 11, 2016 Order at Ex. 1, PDF page 51 [Dkt. 195]; (2 a guarantee that [a]ll Second Chance vests are NIJ certified to the most recent standards, id.; and (3 a guarantee that [t]he protective properties of the PANELS are warranted for five (5 years from date of purchase. See Mot., Ex. 28 at 15 [Dkt. 208]. 4 As relevant here, one of the United States theories of FCA liability under 31 U.S.C. 3729(a(1 is that the invoices submitted by Second Chance and other vest manufacturers constituted an implied certification that the Zylon vests would meet each of these contractual and non-contractual requirements. See Mot. at Judge Roberts, to whom these cases were previously assigned, denied defendants motion for partial summary judgment on the United States implied false certification claims (1 that arose after the 2002 contract modification was executed and (2 that are based on defendants noncompliance with the 6% catalog guarantee. See United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at In determining that the 6% catalog guarantee survives summary judgment 4 While these provisions did not appear in the contracts between the United States and the vest manufacturers, the United States maintains that they animated the bargain it struck when purchasing the vests. See Mot. at The United States modified its contract with Second Chance in 2002 shortly after Second Chance sent the United States its catalog containing the 6% guarantee. See United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at 12. Judge Roberts held 4

5 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 5 of 13 and must proceed to trial, Judge Roberts cited United States v. Science Applications Int l Corp., 626 F.3d 1257, 1269 (D.C. Cir. 2010, for the proposition that [t]he D.C. Circuit s test for falsity based on an implied certification theory requires the government to prove (1 that Toyobo withheld information about its noncompliance with (2 material contract requirements. United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at 17 (emphasis added. Judge Roberts found that the 6% catalog guarantee is an ambiguous contract term because the parties offered multiple reasonable interpretation[s], but [n]either party ha[d] put forward evidence that negates [the other s] interpretation. United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at He concluded that a jury must resolve that ambiguity. Id. at 17. Judge Roberts also found that [t]he 6% guarantee is a contract term that might impose a durability requirement. Id. (emphasis added. He explained that defectiveness is different than durability because [a] product is not defective simply because it does not last as long as the parties expect it to, unless the parties have explicitly contracted for a durability requirement, and expressed skepticism that the parties would include a durability requirement in their contracts where, as here, they also included a repair and replace provision. Id. at He explained that [n]othing in the language of the contract explicitly guarantees that the vests will function perfectly for the five-year period; indeed the that, [b]ecause the catalog statement was attached to the contract modification, it was properly incorporated into the contractual agreement, and therefore that the statement from the Second Chance catalog ( the 6% guarantee was a term of the contract for all claims after the 2002 contract modification. Id. 6 The repair and replace provision states that, [i]n the event a defect is found, in material or workmanship, in either component or your vest, carrier outershell or panels, during the applicable warranty period,... SECOND CHANCE, in its discretion, without cost to you, will repair or replace the defective part or the entire vest. See Mot., Ex. 28 at 5 [Dkt. 208]. 5

6 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 6 of 13 [contract] presupposes that some of the vests may not survive the five-year period. Id. at 14. Judge Roberts concluded that a jury must determine whether the 6% catalog guarantee is, in fact, a durability requirement. Id. at 17. As for the implied false certification claims based on defendants noncompliance with other contractual and non-contractual requirements, Judge Roberts did not provide analysis as to why he granted summary judgment to defendants on those claims. United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at 17. The United States understands that Judge Roberts granted summary judgment to defendants on any implied false certification claim arising (1 before the 2002 contract modification, or (2 based on anything other than the 6% catalog guarantee. Mot. at 10 ( The dismissed claims included all claims based on an implied false certification theory, except for those based on the Second Chance catalog guarantee.... ; see also Reply at 7. The United States moves for reconsideration, arguing that Judge Roberts erred in granting partial summary judgment because the Supreme Court s decision in Escobar significantly clarif[ied] the extent and application of implied false certification theory under the [FCA]. Reply at 7; see also Mot. at Specifically, the United States contends that, as a result of Escobar, the case must proceed to trial on each of the six contractual or non-contractual requirements, not just the 6% catalog guarantee. Mot. at II. DISCUSSION Motions for reconsideration are not specifically addressed in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. While the most analogous rule is Rule 60, which provides relief from a final judgment or order, motions to reconsider interlocutory orders are not governed by Rule 60(b, but rather, such determinations are within the discretion of the trial court. Estate of Klieman 6

7 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 7 of 13 v. Palestinian Auth., 82 F. Supp. 3d 237, (D.D.C (quoting Keystone Tobacco Co. v. United States Tobacco Co., 217 F.R.D. 235, 237 (D.D.C. 2003; see also FED. R. CIV. P. 54(b ( [A]ny order or other decision, however designated, that adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties does not end the action as to any of the claims or parties and may be revised at any time before the entry of a judgment adjudicating all the claims and all the parties rights and liabilities.. Notwithstanding the broad discretion of a court to reconsider its own interlocutory decisions, however, and in light of the need for finality in judicial decision-making, district courts should only reconsider interlocutory orders when the movant demonstrates (1 an intervening change in the law; (2 the discovery of new evidence not previously available; or (3 a clear error of law in the first order. Estate of Klieman v. Palestinian Auth., 82 F. Supp. 3d at 242 (quoting In re Vitamins Antitrust Litig., No , 2000 WL , at *1 (D.D.C. July 28, Within this framework, the United States argues that Escobar is an intervening change in the law in its words, a clarif[ication], see Reply at 7 that would have commanded a different result. Mot. at Defendants disagree, arguing that the Supreme Court s decision in Escobar was consistent with the controlling D.C. Circuit decision on which Judge Roberts relied, United States v. Science Applications Int l Corp., 626 F.3d 1257 (D.C. Cir See Opp. at 9. For the reasons that follow, the Court concludes that reconsideration is appropriate. A. Implied False Certification Under the FCA The False Claims Act prohibits, inter alia, (A knowingly present[ing], or caus[ing] to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval; [and] (B knowingly mak[ing], us[ing], or caus[ing] to be made or used, a false record or statement 7

8 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 8 of 13 material to a false or fraudulent claim. 31 U.S.C. 3729(a(1(A-(B. The elements of a FCA claim under Section 3729(a(1(A are: (1 the defendant submitted a claim to the government, (2 the claim was false, and (3 the defendant knew the claim was false. Pencheng Si v. Laogai Research Found., 71 F. Supp. 3d 73, 91 (D.D.C (internal quotation marks omitted. The elements of a FCA claim under Section 3729(a(1(B are: (1 the defendant made or used [or caused to be made or used] a record or statement; (2 the record or statement was false; (3 the defendant knew it was false; and (4 the record or statement was material to a false or fraudulent claim. United States ex rel. Hood v. Satory Global, Inc., 946 F. Supp. 2d 69, 85 (D.D.C A claim may be either factually or legally false. A factually false claim is one that is untrue on its face, whereas [a] legally false claim a false certification may be either express or implied. United States ex rel. Barko v. Halliburton Co., --- F. Supp. 3d ----, 2017 WL , at *6 (D.D.C. Mar. 14, 2017 (internal quotation marks omitted. An implied false certification may arise [w]hen... a defendant makes representations in submitting a claim but omits its violations of statutory, regulatory, or contractual requirements. Escobar, 136 S. Ct. at In such cases, those omissions can be a basis for liability if they render the defendant s representations misleading with respect to the goods or services provided. Id. The FCA s scienter requirement is met if the defendant (i has actual knowledge of the information; (ii acts in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the information; or (iii acts in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the information. 31 U.S.C. 3729(b(1(A. The FCA also has a materiality requirement. As explained by the Supreme Court in Escobar, for liability to be proved [u]nder the [FCA], the misrepresentation must be material to the other party s course of action. 136 S. Ct. at What matters under the FCA is 8

9 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 9 of 13 whether the defendant knowingly violated a requirement that the defendant knows is material to the Government s payment decision. Id. at The FCA s materiality requirement is met, inter alia, when: [T]he defendant knows that the Government consistently refuses to pay claims in the mine run of cases based on noncompliance with the particular statutory, regulatory, or contractual requirement. Conversely, if the Government pays a particular claim in full despite its actual knowledge that certain requirements were violated, that is very strong evidence that those requirements are not material. Or, if the Government regularly pays a particular type of claim in full despite actual knowledge that certain requirements were violated, and has signaled no change in position, that is strong evidence that the requirements are not material. Id. at The materiality and scienter requirements are rigorous and must be strict[ly] enforce[d]. Id. at The D.C. Circuit recently interpreted Escobar as mak[ing] clear that courts should continue to police expansive implied certification theories through strict enforcement of the Act s materiality and scienter requirements. United States ex rel. McBride v. Halliburton Co., 848 F.3d 1027, 1031 (D.C. Cir In particular, a misrepresentation about compliance with a statutory, regulatory, or contractual requirement must be material to the Government s payment decision in order to be actionable under the [FCA]. Id. In other words, not just any misrepresentation or half-truth even one about compliance with a statutory, regulatory, or contractual requirement suffices; it must be one that is material to the Government s payment decision. Id.; see also Escobar, 136 S. Ct. at Here, the Court concludes that reconsideration of Judge Roberts s September 2015 implied false certification analysis is warranted as a doctrinal matter because Escobar expanded the bases for FCA implied false certification liability. Judge Roberts limited his analysis to defendants representations concerning noncompliance with material contract requirements, see United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. 9

10 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 10 of 13 Supp. 3d at 17, while Escobar now permits liability to attach to material misrepresentations concerning noncompliance with statutory, regulatory, or contractual requirements. Escobar, 136 S. Ct. at The Court therefore will address each of the six contractual and non-contractual requirements with which the United States alleges defendants did not comply in light of Escobar. B. Which Implied False Certification Claims Will Proceed to Trial By his September 4, 2015 decision in this case, Judge Roberts permitted the United States to proceed to trial on its implied false certification claim concerning the 6% catalog guarantee because he found it to be an ambiguous contract term and a term that may impose a durability requirement that is in tension with the contract s repair and replace provision. See United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at The Court agrees. While the three express clauses of the contract the five-year commercial warranty, the workmanship clause, and the new materials clause do not impose a durability requirement, the 6% catalog guarantee may. As noted, the catalog guarantee states that the vest manufacturer guarantees its vests to perform at this level [in V50 ballistics performance] within normal statistical variation (+/-6% during the five-year guaranteed life of the vest. See United States Supp. Brief Pursuant to Court s February 11, 2016 Order at Ex. 1, PDF page 51 [Dkt. 195] (emphasis added. Whatever the ambiguous 6% catalog guarantee means, it is for the jury to decide and Escobar offers no reason to alter that holding. Turning now to the three express contractual requirements (1 the five-year commercial warranty clause, (2 the workmanship clause, and (3 the new materials clause of the United States contracts with Second Chance and other vest manufacturers the Court finds 10

11 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 11 of 13 that Escobar provides no basis for reconsideration of Judge Roberts s implied false certification analysis. Before Escobar, this Circuit held in United States v. Science Applications Int l Corp. that, in order to establish the existence of a false or fraudulent claim on the basis of implied certification of a contractual condition, the FCA plaintiff here the government must show that the contractor withheld information about its noncompliance with material contractual requirements. 626 F.3d at 1269 (emphasis added. Judge Roberts applied United States v. Science Applications Int l Corp. and concluded that the 6% catalog guarantee was the only term of the contract that could give rise to an implied false certification claim under the FCA. United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at 12, 17. The Supreme Court in Escobar did not change the legal principle on which Judge Roberts relied as articulated in United States v. Science Applications Int l Corp. that noncompliance with material contractual requirements is a basis for an implied false certification claim under the FCA. 626 F.3d at Instead, Escobar expanded that principle beyond express contract terms, holding: When... a defendant makes representations in submitting a claim but omits its violations of statutory, regulatory, or contractual requirements, those omissions can be a basis for liability if they render the defendant s representations misleading with respect to the goods or services provided. Escobar, 136 S. Ct. at 1999 (emphasis added. There therefore is no reason to revisit Judge Roberts s conclusion that the United States cannot base its implied false certification claim on any of the three express contractual requirements. Looking next beyond the express contract language to what Judge Roberts described as the extra-contractual considerations that were not explicit terms of the contract but may have otherwise informed[] the actual contracting, United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at 16, the Court concludes that Escobar 11

12 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 12 of 13 warrants reconsideration but commands the original result. As just discussed, Escobar warrants reconsideration because it expanded the basis for an implied false certification claim under the FCA and demands that the Court now consider whether defendants noncompliance with statutory or regulatory requirements also provides a basis for liability. 136 S. Ct. at Nonetheless, applying Escobar, the Court concludes that these extra-contractual considerations (1 a guarantee that vests would meet NIJ regulations and (2 a guarantee that the vests would have certain protective properties, see supra at 4 were not material to the United States payment decision under the FCA. Judge Roberts explained that unlike the 6% catalog guarantee the government... does not point to anything in [its] solicitation, Second Chance s offer, or the Award/Contract that expressly incorporates the expectations of NIJ or certain protective properties. United States ex rel. Westrick v. Second Chance Body Armor Inc., 128 F. Supp. 3d at 13. This record led Judge Roberts to find that there is no evidence that these extra-contractual considerations were a part of, or otherwise informed, the actual contracting. Id. at 16. Escobar again offers no reason to alter that holding, especially because the Supreme Court in Escobar directed courts to emphasize the FCA s materiality requirement in their analysis. 136 S. Ct. at It is plain to the Court that, if neither the NIJ guarantee nor protective properties guarantee was material to the United States contracting decisions as Judge Roberts noted, then those guarantees were similarly not material to the United States payment decisions. The United States implied false certification claim under the FCA therefore is limited to its theory that the 6% catalog guarantee was a durability requirement. 12

13 Case 1:07-cv PLF Document 212 Filed 03/31/17 Page 13 of 13 IV. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that the United States second motion for reconsideration [Dkt. 476 in Civil Action No ] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that the United States second motion for reconsideration [Dkt. 206 in Civil Action No ] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. SO ORDERED. DATE: March 31, 2017 /s/ PAUL L. FRIEDMAN United States District Judge 13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel., ) AARON J. WESTRICK, Ph.D., ) Civil Action No. 04-0280 (PLF) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) SECOND CHANCE BODY ARMOR,

More information

Session: The False Claims Act Post-Escobar. Authors: Robert L. Vogel and Andrew H. Miller THE ESCOBAR CASE: SOME PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS INTRODUCTION

Session: The False Claims Act Post-Escobar. Authors: Robert L. Vogel and Andrew H. Miller THE ESCOBAR CASE: SOME PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS INTRODUCTION Session: The False Claims Act Post-Escobar Authors: Robert L. Vogel and Andrew H. Miller THE ESCOBAR CASE: SOME PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS INTRODUCTION In United Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK INTRODUCTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK INTRODUCTION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. LEE STROCK, et al. Plaintiff, Defendants. Case # 15-CV-887-FPG DECISION & ORDER INTRODUCTION Plaintiff United States

More information

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No Intervenor/Plaintiff Appellant,

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No Intervenor/Plaintiff Appellant, Case 1:11-cv-00288-GBL-JFA Document 91 Filed 05/16/17 Page 1 of 11 PageID# 864 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2190 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Intervenor/Plaintiff

More information

Case 1:08-cv RWR-JMF Document 63 Filed 01/25/12 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:08-cv RWR-JMF Document 63 Filed 01/25/12 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:08-cv-00961-RWR-JMF Document 63 Filed 01/25/12 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 08-961

More information

How Escobar Reframes FCA's Materiality Standard

How 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 information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER FILED 2016 Jun-28 PM 05:10 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES ex rel. RANDI CREIGHTON, v. Plaintiff,

More information

Case 1:04-cv RWR-AK Document 217 Filed 02/23/10 Page 1 of 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:04-cv RWR-AK Document 217 Filed 02/23/10 Page 1 of 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:04-cv-00280-RWR-AK Document 217 Filed 02/23/10 Page 1 of 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES, ex rel. ) WESTRICK, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 SCOTT ROSE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. STEPHENS INSTITUTE, Defendant. Case No. 0-cv-0-PJH ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Re: Dkt. No.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA U.S. ex rel. Tullio Emanuele, ) ) ) Plaintiff/Relator, ) v. ) C.A. No. 10-245 Erie ) Medicor Associates, et al, ) ) Defendants.

More information

O n January 8, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals

O n January 8, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals Federal Contracts Report Reproduced with permission from Federal Contracts Report, 103 FCR, 02/09/2015. Copyright 2015 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (800-372-1033) http://www.bna.com False Claims

More information

IN THE DISTRICT COURT FOR MAYES COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA

IN THE DISTRICT COURT FOR MAYES COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA IN THE DISTRICT COURT FOR MAYES COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA STEVEN W. LEMMINGS, and CITY OF PRYOR CREEK, on behalf of themselves and all other persons or entities similarly situated, Plaintiffs, CASE NO.

More information

#:1224. Attorneys for the United States of America UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION 14

#: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 information

Physician s Guide to the False Claims Act - Part I

Physician s Guide to the False Claims Act - Part I Physician s Guide to the False Claims Act - Part I Authored by W. Scott Keaty and Joshua G. McDiarmid June 15, 2017 As we noted in our recent articles concerning the Stark law (the Physician s Guide to

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-0798 (PLF) ) ALL ASSETS HELD AT BANK JULIUS, ) Baer & Company, Ltd., Guernsey

More information

Case 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 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 information

Universal Health Services, Inc. v. Escobar

Universal Health Services, Inc. v. Escobar Universal Health Services, Inc. v. Escobar MARK E. HADDAD * AND NAOMI A. IGRA ** WHY IT MADE THE LIST Escobar 1 made this year s list because it addressed the reach of one of the government s most powerful

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. AMBER HALL, v. Plaintiff/Relator, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER LEARNKEY, INC.; JEFF CORUCCINI;

More information

Case 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 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 information

MATERIALITY AFTER ESCOBAR: THE FIFTH CIRCUIT S HARMAN DECISION Robert L. Vogel Vogel, Slade & Goldstein October 6, 2017

MATERIALITY AFTER ESCOBAR: THE FIFTH CIRCUIT S HARMAN DECISION Robert L. Vogel Vogel, Slade & Goldstein October 6, 2017 MATERIALITY AFTER ESCOBAR: THE FIFTH CIRCUIT S HARMAN DECISION Robert L. Vogel Vogel, Slade & Goldstein October 6, 2017 In United States ex rel. Harman v. Trinity Industries, Inc., Case No. 15-41172, 2017

More information

2:12-cv DCN Date Filed 04/09/13 Entry Number 32 Page 1 of 9

2:12-cv DCN Date Filed 04/09/13 Entry Number 32 Page 1 of 9 2:12-cv-02860-DCN Date Filed 04/09/13 Entry Number 32 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION IN RE: MI WINDOWS AND DOORS, ) INC. PRODUCTS

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case:-cv-00-TEH Document Filed0 Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KIMBERLY YORDY, Plaintiff, v. PLIMUS, INC, Defendant. Case No. -cv-00-teh ORDER DENYING CLASS CERTIFICATION

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS. August Term, Argued: March 1, 2016 Final Submission: August 1, 2017 Decided: September 7, 2017

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS. August Term, Argued: March 1, 2016 Final Submission: August 1, 2017 Decided: September 7, 2017 15-2449 United States v. Wells Fargo & Co. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 2016 Argued: March 1, 2016 Final Submission: August 1, 2017 Decided: September 7, 2017 Docket

More information

Case 1:05-cv RMC Document 35 Filed 04/19/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:05-cv RMC Document 35 Filed 04/19/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:05-cv-02345-RMC Document 35 Filed 04/19/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TEMBEC INC., et al., Petitioners, v. Civil Action No. 05-2345 (RMC UNITED STATES

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION Case: 1:09-cv-07704 Document #: 46 Filed: 03/12/13 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:293 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATE OF AMERICA, ex rel.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED 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 information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Barbara Waldrup v. Countrywide Financial Corporation et al Doc. 148 Present: The Honorable CHRISTINA A. SNYDER Catherine Jeang Not Present N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorneys

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel Michael Durkin Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, Defendant. Case No.: cv-mma (WVG) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S

More information

Case: 1:11-cv Document #: 142 Filed: 11/23/16 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:2876

Case: 1:11-cv Document #: 142 Filed: 11/23/16 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:2876 Case: 1:11-cv-05158 Document #: 142 Filed: 11/23/16 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:2876 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,

More information

Case 1:15-cv FPG Document 1 Filed 10/07/15 Page 1 of 32

Case 1:15-cv FPG Document 1 Filed 10/07/15 Page 1 of 32 Case 1:15-cv-00887-FPG Document 1 Filed 10/07/15 Page 1 of 32 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK : UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : : Plaintiff, : : -v- : 15-CV- : LEE STROCK, KENNETH

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHREVEPORT DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CIVIL ACTION NO EX. REL.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHREVEPORT DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CIVIL ACTION NO EX. REL. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHREVEPORT DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-2584 EX. REL. DANA CURTIN VERSUS BARTON MALOW CO. JUDGE S. MAURICE HICKS, JR.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND : EXCHANGE COMMISSION, : : Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 11-2054 (RC) : v. : Re Documents No.: 32, 80 : GARFIELD

More information

Case 1:18-cv ABJ Document 18 Filed 02/06/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

Case 1:18-cv ABJ Document 18 Filed 02/06/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Case 1:18-cv-00011-ABJ Document 18 Filed 02/06/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PAUL J. MANAFORT, JR., Plaintiff, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ROD J. ROSENSTEIN,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. Plaintiffs, September 18, 2017

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. Plaintiffs, September 18, 2017 JERSEY STRONG PEDIATRICS, LLC v. WANAQUE CONVALESCENT CENTER et al Doc. 29 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, the STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

More information

Fried Frank FraudMail Alert No /17/16

Fried Frank FraudMail Alert No /17/16 FraudMail Alert Please click here to view our archives CIVIL FALSE CLAIMS ACT: Supreme Court Rejects DOJ s Expansive Theory for FCA Falsity and Requires Rigorous Materiality, Scienter Standards in All

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and Plaintiff, Case No. 08-CV-384-JPS DEBORA PARADIES, LONDON LEWIS, ROBERTA MANLEY, v. Relators, ASERACARE, INC., and

More information

Focus. FEATURE COMMENT: Frankenstein s Monster Is (Still) Alive: Supreme Court Recognizes Validity Of Implied Certification Theory

Focus. FEATURE COMMENT: Frankenstein s Monster Is (Still) Alive: Supreme Court Recognizes Validity Of Implied Certification Theory Reprinted from The Government Contractor, with permission of Thomson Reuters. Copyright 2016. Further use without the permission of West is prohibited. For further information about this publication, please

More information

Case 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 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 information

Case 1:07-cv JFA Document 400 Filed 07/12/10 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

Case 1:07-cv JFA Document 400 Filed 07/12/10 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION Case 1:07-cv-00960-JFA Document 400 Filed 07/12/10 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ex rel. Oberg, ) ) Plaintiff,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION Doc. 210 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MEMORANDUM OPINION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MEMORANDUM OPINION PROTOPAPAS et al v. EMCOR GOVERNMENT SERVICES, INC. et al Doc. 33 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA GEORGE PROTOPAPAS, Plaintiff, v. EMCOR GOVERNMENT SERVICES, INC., Civil Action

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN Middleton-Cross Plains Area School District v. Fieldturf USA, Inc. Doc. 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MIDDLETON-CROSS PLAINS AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, v. FIELDTURF

More information

Case 1:08-cv JSR Document 151 Filed 05/23/16 Page 1 of 14

Case 1:08-cv JSR Document 151 Filed 05/23/16 Page 1 of 14 Case 1:08-cv-02875-JSR Document 151 Filed 05/23/16 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------x LARYSSA JOCK, et al., Plaintiffs, 08 Civ.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO Case 1:10-cv-00439-BLW Document 168 Filed 03/13/12 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO MORNINGSTAR HOLDING CORPORATION, a Utah corporation, qualified to do business in Idaho,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 0:11-cv WPD.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 0:11-cv WPD. DR. MASSOOD JALLALI, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 12-10148 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 0:11-cv-60342-WPD versus NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY, INC., DOES,

More information

Case3:13-cv SI Document39 Filed11/18/13 Page1 of 8

Case3:13-cv SI Document39 Filed11/18/13 Page1 of 8 Case:-cv-0-SI Document Filed// Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 0 STEVEN POLNICKY, v. Plaintiff, LIBERTY LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF BOSTON; WELLS FARGO

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WICHITA FALLS DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WICHITA FALLS DIVISION Case 7:03-cv-00102-D Document 858 Filed 10/18/18 Page 1 of 12 PageID 23956 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WICHITA FALLS DIVISION VICTORIA KLEIN, et al., Plaintiffs,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. * KEN E. WILLIAMS, * * Plaintiff-Relator, * * v. * * Civil Action No. 12-cv-12193-IT CITY OF BROCKTON, CITY OF *

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 DEWAYNE JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. MONSANTO COMPANY, et al., Defendants. Case No. -cv-0-mmc ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND; VACATING

More information

x : : : : : : : : : x Plaintiffs, current and former female employees of defendant

x : : : : : : : : : x Plaintiffs, current and former female employees of defendant UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------- LARYSSA JOCK, et al., Plaintiffs, -v- STERLING JEWELERS, INC., Defendant. -------------------------------------

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendant.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendant. Case :-cv-00-ben-ksc Document 0 Filed 0// PageID.0 Page of 0 0 ANDREA NATHAN, on behalf of herself, all others similarly situated, v. VITAMIN SHOPPE, INC., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT

More information

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 21 Filed: 03/27/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:84

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 21 Filed: 03/27/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:84 Case: 1:16-cv-04522 Document #: 21 Filed: 03/27/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:84 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION LISA SKINNER, Plaintiff, v. Case No.

More information

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION Case 1:13-cv-03074-TWT Document 47 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 16 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION SPENCER ABRAMS Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, et al.,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA VALAMBHIA et al v. UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA et al Doc. 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA VIPULA D. VALAMBHIA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 18-cv-370 (TSC UNITED

More information

Escobar Turns One: False Claims Act Materiality in 2017

Escobar Turns One: False Claims Act Materiality in 2017 Escobar Turns One: False Claims Act Materiality in 2017 Tuesday, June 27, 2017 12:00 pm 1:30 pm ET Rebecca ( Becky ) E. Pearson, Esq. Partner, Government Contracts Practice, Venable LLP 202.344.8183 repearson@venable.com

More information

1:15-cv JMC Date Filed 04/06/15 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

1:15-cv JMC Date Filed 04/06/15 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA 1:15-cv-01511-JMC Date Filed 04/06/15 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA AIKEN DIVISION Robert K. Besley, Jr., on behalf of himself ) and

More information

Case 3:10-cv RBL Document 40 Filed 04/11/12 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

Case 3:10-cv RBL Document 40 Filed 04/11/12 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA Case :0-cv-00-RBL Document 0 Filed 0// Page of HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA SHELLEY DENTON, and all others similarly situated, No.

More information

Case 0:17-cv XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/13/2017 Page 1 of 12

Case 0:17-cv XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/13/2017 Page 1 of 12 Case 0:17-cv-60089-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/13/2017 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MICHAEL PANARIELLO, individually and on behalf

More information

United States District Court Central District of California Western Division

United States District Court Central District of California Western Division Case :-cv-0-tjh-rao Document 0 Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 0 MANAN BHATT, et al., v. United States District Court Central District of California Western Division Plaintiffs, Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC,

More information

Case 1:12-cv JCC-TRJ Document 27 Filed 09/04/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID# 168

Case 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 information

Case 6:14-cv CEM-TBS Document 31 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1331

Case 6:14-cv CEM-TBS Document 31 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1331 Case 6:14-cv-01400-CEM-TBS Document 31 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1331 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION MARRIOTT OWNERSHIP RESORTS, INC., MARRIOTT VACATIONS

More information

Case 3:18-cv AET-LHG Document 61 Filed 06/08/18 Page 1 of 8 PageID: 972 : : : : : : : : : : : : :

Case 3:18-cv AET-LHG Document 61 Filed 06/08/18 Page 1 of 8 PageID: 972 : : : : : : : : : : : : : Case 318-cv-10500-AET-LHG Document 61 Filed 06/08/18 Page 1 of 8 PageID 972 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------ x LAUREN

More information

Case 5:10-cv HRL Document 65 Filed 10/26/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 5:10-cv HRL Document 65 Filed 10/26/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :0-cv-0-HRL Document Filed 0// Page of 0 E-filed 0//0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 HAYLEY HICKCOX-HUFFMAN, Plaintiff, v. US AIRWAYS, INC., et al., Defendants. Case

More information

Andrew Walzer v. Muriel Siebert Co

Andrew Walzer v. Muriel Siebert Co 2011 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 10-6-2011 Andrew Walzer v. Muriel Siebert Co Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 10-4526 Follow

More information

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SUPREME 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 information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. MARJORIE PRATHER, v. Plaintiff, BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES, INC.,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE Case :-cv-0-rsl Document 0 Filed 0// Page of 0 MONEY MAILER, LLC, v. WADE G. BREWER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE Plaintiff, Defendant. WADE G. BREWER, v. Counterclaim

More information

Case 9:09-cv RC Document 100 Filed 08/10/12 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 991 **NOT FOR PRINTED PUBLICATION**

Case 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 information

Case 3:06-cv JAP-TJB Document 62 Filed 07/22/2008 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 3:06-cv JAP-TJB Document 62 Filed 07/22/2008 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 3:06-cv-02319-JAP-TJB Document 62 Filed 07/22/2008 Page 1 of 13 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY : TRENTON METROPOLITAN AREA : LOCAL OF THE AMERICAN

More information

Case 1:15-cv JSR Document 76 Filed 06/07/16 Page 1 of 11

Case 1:15-cv JSR Document 76 Filed 06/07/16 Page 1 of 11 Case 1:15-cv-09796-JSR Document 76 Filed 06/07/16 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------x SPENCER MEYER, individually and on behalf

More information

PROCUREMENT FRAUD PANEL DISCUSSION. June 14, :30 P.M.

PROCUREMENT FRAUD PANEL DISCUSSION. June 14, :30 P.M. PROCUREMENT FRAUD PANEL DISCUSSION June 14, 2018 1:30 P.M. PANELISTS DAVID J. CHIZEWER GOLDBERG KOHN VINCENT MCKNIGHT SANFORD HEISLER SHARP LLP DONALD J. WILLIAMSON UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION OPINION & ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION OPINION & ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION LA COMISION EJECUTIVA } HIDROELECCTRICA DEL RIO LEMPA, } } Movant, } } VS. } MISC ACTION NO. H-08-335 } EL PASO CORPORATION,

More information

Case3:10-cv SI Document235 Filed05/24/12 Page1 of 7

Case3:10-cv SI Document235 Filed05/24/12 Page1 of 7 Case:0-cv-00-SI Document Filed0// Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 KILOPASS TECHNOLOGY INC., v. Plaintiff, SIDENSE CORPORATION, Defendant. / No. C 0-00

More information

Case: 2:15-cv WOB-JGW Doc #: 43 Filed: 07/13/17 Page: 1 of 12 - Page ID#: 379

Case: 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 information

Case 4:11-cv TCK-FHM Document 42 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 11/05/14 Page 1 of 13

Case 4:11-cv TCK-FHM Document 42 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 11/05/14 Page 1 of 13 Case 4:11-cv-00808-TCK-FHM Document 42 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 11/05/14 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ex rel. MARK TROXLER,

More information

Case 2:13-cv MMB Document 173 Filed 02/13/15 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:13-cv MMB Document 173 Filed 02/13/15 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 2:13-cv-05101-MMB Document 173 Filed 02/13/15 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TALBOT TODD SMITH CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 13-5101 UNILIFE CORPORATION,

More information

Case 2:11-cv CDJ Document 102 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:11-cv CDJ Document 102 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 2:11-cv-04607-CDJ Document 102 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., : ex rel. SALLY SCHIMELPFENIG

More information

J S - 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. CASE NO. CV JST (FMOx) GLOBAL DÉCOR, INC. and THOMAS H. WOLF.

J S - 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. CASE NO. CV JST (FMOx) GLOBAL DÉCOR, INC. and THOMAS H. WOLF. Case :-cv-00-jls-fmo Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Page ID #: 0 0 GLOBAL DÉCOR, INC. and THOMAS H. WOLF vs. Plaintiffs, THE CINCINNATI INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL

More information

Case 1:12-cv DAB Document 116 Filed 08/10/17 Page 1 of 39

Case 1:12-cv DAB Document 116 Filed 08/10/17 Page 1 of 39 Case 1:12-cv-01750-DAB Document 116 Filed 08/10/17 Page 1 of 39 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------X United States of America ex rel.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SOUTHERN DIVISION No. 7:16-CV-305-BO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SOUTHERN DIVISION No. 7:16-CV-305-BO ,, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SOUTHERN DIVISION No. 7:16-CV-305-BO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) CATHERINE ANN LANG, a/k/a ) "Catherine

More information

Defendant. SUMMARY ORDER. Plaintiff PPC Broadband, Inc., d/b/a PPC commenced this action

Defendant. 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 information

Case 1:10-cv LTS-GWG Document 223 Filed 04/11/14 Page 1 of 14. No. 10 Civ. 954 (LTS)(GWG)

Case 1:10-cv LTS-GWG Document 223 Filed 04/11/14 Page 1 of 14. No. 10 Civ. 954 (LTS)(GWG) Case 1:10-cv-00954-LTS-GWG Document 223 Filed 04/11/14 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------x SEVERSTAL WHEELING,

More information

Case 2:16-cv AJS Document 125 Filed 01/27/17 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:16-cv AJS Document 125 Filed 01/27/17 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 2:16-cv-01375-AJS Document 125 Filed 01/27/17 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA LISA GATHERS, et al., 16cv1375 v. Plaintiffs, LEAD CASE NEW YORK

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. United States of America et al v. IPC The Hospitalist Company, Inc. et al Doc. 91 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION United States of America, ex rel. Bijan Oughatiyan,

More information

Case 3:14-cv VAB Document 62 Filed 06/01/16 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

Case 3:14-cv VAB Document 62 Filed 06/01/16 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT Case 3:14-cv-01714-VAB Document 62 Filed 06/01/16 Page 1 of 11 PAUL T. EDWARDS, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT v. CASE NO. 3:14-cv-1714 (VAB) NORTH AMERICAN POWER AND GAS,

More information

Case 1:15-cv JMF Document 9 Filed 08/27/15 Page 1 of 14

Case 1:15-cv JMF Document 9 Filed 08/27/15 Page 1 of 14 Case 1:15-cv-04685-JMF Document 9 Filed 08/27/15 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : IN RE:

More information

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois Order Form (01/2005) United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois Name of Assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge Amy J. St. Eve Sitting Judge if Other than Assigned Judge CASE NUMBER 11 C 9175

More information

Case 1:18-cv ABJ Document 19 Filed 02/13/18 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Plaintiff, Defendants.

Case 1:18-cv ABJ Document 19 Filed 02/13/18 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Plaintiff, Defendants. Case 1:18-cv-00011-ABJ Document 19 Filed 02/13/18 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PAUL J. MANAFORT, JR., Plaintiff, v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ROD J. ROSENSTEIN,

More information

Case 3:15-cv MMC Document 113 Filed 11/22/16 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:15-cv MMC Document 113 Filed 11/22/16 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case :-cv-0-mmc Document Filed // Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KAPU GEMS, ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. DIAMOND IMPORTS, INC., et al., Defendants. Case No.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case 2:14-cv-09281-PSG-SH Document 34 Filed 04/02/15 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #:422 Present: The Honorable Philip S. Gutierrez, United States District Judge Wendy Hernandez Deputy Clerk Attorneys Present for

More information

Case 1:04-cv RWR Document 184 Filed 09/15/2009 Page 1 of 48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:04-cv RWR Document 184 Filed 09/15/2009 Page 1 of 48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Case 1:04-cv-01543-RWR Document 184 Filed 09/15/2009 Page 1 of 48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-1543

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Case: 10-30376 Document: 00511415363 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/17/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D March 17, 2011 Lyle

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION. ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION. ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. KIMBERLY BRANSCOME, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No.: 7:16cv00087 BLUE RIDGE HOME

More information

Case3:13-cv SI Document71 Filed07/07/14 Page1 of 7

Case3:13-cv SI Document71 Filed07/07/14 Page1 of 7 Case:-cv-0-SI Document Filed0/0/ Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 ROBERT E. FIGY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiff,

More information

OPINION AND ORDER. Securities Class Action Complaint ("Complaint") pursuant to Rules 9(b) and 12(b)(6) of the

OPINION AND ORDER. Securities Class Action Complaint (Complaint) pursuant to Rules 9(b) and 12(b)(6) of the ORIGI NAL ' Case 1:05-cv-05323-LTS Document 62 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 1 of 14 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #: x DATE FILED: D 7/,V/

More information

Case 1:11-cv ALC-AJP Document 175 Filed 04/26/12 Page 1 of 5 Please visit

Case 1:11-cv ALC-AJP Document 175 Filed 04/26/12 Page 1 of 5 Please visit Case 1:11-cv-01279-ALC-AJP Document 175 Filed 04/26/12 Page 1 of 5 Please visit www.itlawtoday.com Case 1:11-cv-01279-ALC-AJP Document 175 Filed 04/26/12 Page 2 of 5 Plaintiffs object to the February 8

More information

Case 2:08-cv JLL-CCC Document 46 Filed 10/23/2009 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 2:08-cv JLL-CCC Document 46 Filed 10/23/2009 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 2:08-cv-04143-JLL-CCC Document 46 Filed 10/23/2009 Page 1 of 13 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY THOMASON AUTO GROUP, LLC, v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: 08-4143

More information

Case 1:13-cv LGS Document 20 Filed 06/26/13 Page 1 of 8. : Plaintiffs, : : : Defendants. :

Case 1:13-cv LGS Document 20 Filed 06/26/13 Page 1 of 8. : Plaintiffs, : : : Defendants. : Case 113-cv-01787-LGS Document 20 Filed 06/26/13 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------- X BLOOMBERG, L.P.,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 0 In re: AutoZone, Inc., Wage and Hour Employment Practices Litigation / No.: :0-md-0-CRB Hon. Charles R. Breyer ORDER DENYING

More information