United States v. Sprint Communications, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BERZON, Circuit Judge:
John C. Prather sought to intervene as of right in a False Claims Act (“FCA”) suit brought by the United States (“Government”) against Sprint Communications, 'Inc. (“Sprint”). Whether Prather had the significantly protectable interest required to support his motion to intervene depends on whether he would have been entitled to any recovery if the Government had intervened in his 2009 qui tarn FCA action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2); Prather v. AT&T, 847 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2017) (“Prather I”). We conclude that Government intervention in Prather’s qui tam action…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Church of Scientology of California v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- City of Erie v. Pap's A. M.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Mills v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Rockwell International Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Graham County Soil & Water Conservation District v. United States Ex Rel. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Kevin Cooper v. Gavin NewsomCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021
- United States ex rel. Conner v. MahajanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017
- Center for Biological Diversity v. BlmCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2023
- United States ex rel. Rafter H Constr., LLC v. Big-D Constr. Corp.District Court, D. Idaho · 2018
- Burke v. St. Jude Medical, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2021
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.