Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
United States, ex rel. Laurence Schneider v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, No. 19-7025 · judgment August 22, 2019
Before the decision, about 6.2× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a federal-government petitioner, a D.C. Circuit decision below, and a circuit split argued in the petition, and down for a business respondent.
Question presented
The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision granting the Government’s motion to dismiss this action pursuant to the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(2)(A). In doing so the D.C. Circuit described a split among the circuits regarding their treatment of such motions by the Government. The order specifically stated The False Claims Act “give[s] the government an unfettered right to dismiss [a qui tam] action,” citing Swift v. United States, 318 F.3d 250, 252 (D.C. Cir. 2003). The order also stated that the D.C. Circuit “declined to adopt the standard of the Ninth Circuit, under which the Government must initially show that dismissal is ‘rationally related to a valid purpose,’ after which the relator bears the burden to show the decision to dismiss is ‘fraudulent, illegal, or arbitrary and capricious.’” citing United States ex rel. Sequoia Orange Co. v. Baird-Neece Packing Corp., 151 F.3d 1139, 1145 (9th Cir. 1998)). (App.2a) THUS, THE QUESTION PRESENTED IS: Whether the Government is entitled to absolute deference regarding its decision to dismiss an FCA action under section 3730(c)(2)(A), or whether the qui tam relator should be granted the right to demonstrate that the Government’s rationale for dismissal is “fraudulent, illegal, or arbitrary and capricious.”
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Roberto Luigi Di Marco
Foster, Walker & Di Marco, P.C.
For respondent
Noel John Francisco
Jones Day
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Apr 06 2020Petition DENIED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
- Mar 18 2020DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/3/2020.
- Mar 12 2020Reply of petitioners Laurence Schneider,et al. filed.
- Mar 04 2020Brief of respondents JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association; JP Morgan Chase & Co.; Chase Home Finance, LLC in opposition filed.
- Mar 04 2020Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
- Jan 21 2020Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including March 4, 2020, for all respondents.
- Jan 17 2020Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including March 4, 2020, for all respondents.
- Jan 17 2020Motion of respondents JPMorgan Chase Bank, et al. to extend the time to file a response from January 27, 2020 to March 4, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jan 16 2020Motion of the Solicitor General to extend the time to file a response from January 27, 2020 to March 4, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
- Dec 18 2019The motions to extend the time to file responses are granted and the time is extended to and including January 27, 2020, for all respondents.
- Dec 17 2019Motion of the Solicitor General to extend the time to file a response from December 26, 2019 to January 27, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
- Dec 17 2019Motion of respondents JPMorgan Chase Bank, et al. to extend the time to file a response from December 26, 2019 to January 27, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
- Nov 20 2019Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 26, 2019)