Legal Opinion
United States ex rel. Ruhe v. Masimo Corp.
District Court, C.D. California
Decided July 9, 2012No. Case No. CV 10-08169-CJC(JCGx)PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING IN SUBSTANTIAL PART DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND STRIKE
CORMAC J. CARNEY, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
On October 29, 2010, Relators Michael Ruhe, Kristine Serwitz, and Vincente Caíala (collectively, “Relators”), former sales representatives employed by Defendant Masimo Corporation (“Masimo”), filed this qui tarn action and served the complaint on the United States (the “government”) along with substantially all material evidence in their possession. On October 22, 2011, Relators filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) asserting claims against Masimo for…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Cafasso v. General Dynamics C4 Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- John Doe v. United States of America, in Re John Doe, Debtor. John Doe v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Fantasy, Inc. v. FogertyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Marroquin v. Pfizer, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2019
- United States v. Pfizer, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2014
- United States ex rel. Hagerty v. Cyberonics, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2015
- Erhart v. BofI Holding, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2017
- City of Chicago v. Purdue Pharma L.P.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2016
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.