United States ex rel. Budike v. Peco Energy
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
SURRICK, District Judge.
Presently before the Court are Defendants PECO Energy Company, Philadelphia Regional Port Authority and General Dynamics American Overseas Marine’s Motions To Dismiss the Amended Complaint. (ECF Nos. 43-45.) For the following reasons, the Motions will be granted in part and denied in part.
I. JURISDICTION
We have subject matter jurisdiction over the alleged violations of the False Claims *306Act (“FCA,” or the “Act”) in the instant action pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3732(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.1 We also have supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claim pursuant…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Phillips v. County of AlleghenyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
- Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- United States ex rel. Spay v. CVS Caremark Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012
- United States ex rel. Knisely v. Cintas Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
- Richard E. Pierson Constr. Co. v. Phila. Reg'l Port Auth.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2018
- KH v. VIWAPADistrict Court, Virgin Islands · 2025
- RUFO v. FOXDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2021
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.