§Why CasetextPricing

United States of America, ex rel Michael J. Fisher v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION for Summary Judgment / Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Under Public Disclosure Bar

32 Cited authorities

  1. Rockwell Int'l Corp. et al. v. United States

    549 U.S. 457 (2007)   Cited 799 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the term "allegations" as used in § 3730(e) "is not limited to the allegations in the original complaint" and "includes (at a minimum) the allegations in the original complaint as amended"

  2. Graham County Soil v. U.S. ex rel. Wilson

    559 U.S. 280 (2010)   Cited 465 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding “administrative” refers to activities of governmental agencies or their contractors

  3. United States ex rel. Moore & Co. P.A. v. Majestic Blue Fisheries, LLC

    812 F.3d 294 (3d Cir. 2016)   Cited 216 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "plaintiff alleging fraud must . . . support its allegations with all of the essential factual background that would accompany the first paragraph of any newspaper story—that is, the who, what, when, where and how of the events at issue"

  4. Ritchie v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

    558 F.3d 1161 (10th Cir. 2009)   Cited 174 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding that motion to amend was untimely and unduly prejudicial where it was made after close of a long discovery period and after defendant had filed a motion for summary judgment premised on the releases signed by plaintiff

  5. U.S. Duxbury v. Ortho Biotech Pro

    579 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2009)   Cited 155 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in actions “in which the defendant induced third parties to file false claims with the government,” it was not necessary to “provid[e] details as to each false claim” if there were “factual or statistical evidence to strengthen the inference of fraud beyond possibility”

  6. U.S. v. Smithkline Beecham

    149 F.3d 227 (3d Cir. 1998)   Cited 197 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the original complaints' failure specifically to mention [a new] blood test[] for which [the defendant] fraudulently billed the government is of no significance" because the original relator alleged the same essential facts and the second relator did not describe a separate fraudulent scheme as to the new blood test

  7. United States v. Renda Marine, Inc.

    667 F.3d 651 (5th Cir. 2012)   Cited 131 times
    Noting that "offset is an affirmative defense, … such that it is [defendant's] burden to establish beyond peradventure all of the essential elements of the defense"

  8. U.S. ex Rel. Reagan v. East Texas Med. Center

    384 F.3d 168 (5th Cir. 2004)   Cited 120 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the original source requirement is satisfied where a relator's investigation or experience “translate into some additional compelling fact, or ... demonstrate a new and undisclosed relationship between disclosed facts.”

  9. United States ex rel. Jamison v. McKesson Corp.

    649 F.3d 322 (5th Cir. 2011)   Cited 97 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a relator was not an original source of the allegations in his complaint because the information on which the allegations were based described the fraud only generally

  10. Federal Recovery Services, Inc. v. U.S.

    72 F.3d 447 (5th Cir. 1996)   Cited 122 times
    Holding that relators who brought suit against a competitor and other defendants were not original sources

  11. Section 3730 - Civil actions for false claims

    31 U.S.C. § 3730   Cited 5,349 times   430 Legal Analyses
    Granting the government primary responsibility for conducting suit