Legal Opinion
D'Agostino v. EV3, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided December 23, 2016No. 16-1126PPublishedCited by 64 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KAYATTA, Circuit Judge.
This qui tam action makes its second appearance before us. Last year, we held that the district court should have evaluated Jeffrey D’Agostino’s request for leave to file his fourth amended complaint under the standard set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a). United States ex rel. D’Agostino v. ev3, Inc. (D’Agostino I), 802 F.3d 188, 193-96 (1st Cir. 2015). On remand, the district court found that D’Agostino’s desired amendment failed under that standard because, even as proposed to be amended, the complaint did not allege claims upon which the court could…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs' Legal CommitteeSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. EscobarSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Glassman v. Computervision Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1996
- Allison Engine Co. v. United States Ex Rel. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- Parker v. LandryCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2019
- Guilfoile v. ShieldsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2019
- United States Ex Rel. Campie v. Gilead Sciences, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Painters & Allied Trades Dist. Council 82 Health Care Fund v. Forest Pharm., Inc. (In Re Celexa & Lexapro Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig.)Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2019
- United States Ex Rel. Harman v. Trinity Industries Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2017
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.