Legal Opinion
Prather v. AT&T, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 6, 2017No. 13-17489PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SESSIONS, District Judge:
OVERVIEW
John C. Prather, a longtime state prosecutor, brought a qui tam action alleging that the largest telecommunications (“tele-com”) companies in the United States were fraudulently overcharging the federal government for surveillance services. The district court dismissed Prather’s action under the False Claims Act’s (“FCA”) public disclosure bar, which states that once allegations of fraud have entered the public domain a person may not bring a qui tam action unless he can prove that he was an original source of those allegations. See 31 U.S.C. §…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Rockwell International Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States Ex Rel. SchumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Graham County Soil & Water Conservation District v. United States Ex Rel. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Chen-Cheng Wang, AKA C.C. Wang, an Individual and Ex Rel. The United States of America v. Fmc CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- United States of America, Ex Rel. Stinson, Lyons, Gerlin & Bustamante, P.A. v. The Prudential Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- United States of America ex v. Keypoint Government SolutionsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2019
- Derek Hoggett v. University of PhoenixCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- United States v. Sprint Communications, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- US Ex Rel. Marc Wichansky v. Zoel Holding Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Muckleshoot Indian Tribe v. Tulalip TribesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.