United States Ex Rel. Permison v. Superlative Technologies, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• commenting on possible remedies potentially available to a qui tam plaintiff for whom the antiretaliatory provisions of the False Claims Act were inapplicable
• commenting on possible remedies potentially available to a qui tarn plaintiff for whom the antiretaliatory provisions of the False Claims Act were inapplicable
• unsealing complaint because relator’s fear of retaliation, although “not entirely implausible,” was not supported by specific facts
• in a qui tam suit against the plaintiff’s former employer, denying a request to seal the complaint or to grant anonymity because although “fear of retaliation is not entirely implausible, it is certainly vague and hypothetical at best”
• “[T]he presumption in favor of public access to court filings is especially strong where, as here, the filings involve matters of particular concern to the public, such as allegations of fraud against the government.”
• denying relator’s request for redactions on that basis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).