United States of America, Ex Rel. D.J. Findley v. Fpc-Boron Employees' Club

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “[i]f a relator merely uses his or her unique expertise or training to conclude that the material elements already in the public domain constitute a false claim, then a qui tam action cannot proceed”
• acknowledging that “our interpretation of the jurisdictional bar may on occasion prevent qui tom lawsuits that may not be truly ‘parasitic’ ”
• explaining that a relator must have direct and independent knowledge \of the information on which the publicly disclosed allegations are based\
• finding that Siller’s definition of “based upon” renders the “original source” provision largely superfluous
• finding that a qui tam action was barred where the complaint was based on publicly disclosed information that “already enable[d] the government to adequately investigate the case and to make a decision whether to prosecute”
• explaining that if a complaint “merely echoes publicly disclosed, allegedly fraudulent transactions that already enable the government to adequately investigate the case and to make a decision whether to prosecute, the public disclosure bar applies”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).