Legal Opinion
US Ex Rel. Atkinson v. Pennsylvania Shipbuilding
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided December 3, 2007No. Civil Action 94-7316PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum and Order
WILLIAM H. YOHN, JR., District Judge.
At the conclusion of more than thirteen years of litigation, defendants Pennsylvania Shipbuilding Co. (“Penn Ship”) and First Fidelity Bank (“Fidelity”) move to recover attorney fees and expenses under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d) (4), for their successful defense of this qui tam action. 1 For the reasons discussed herein, their requests will be denied.
1. History and Procedure
On previous occasions, the court has discussed the factual underpinnings and procedural development of relator Paul Atkinson’s claims, 2 so I…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human ResourcesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Texas State Teachers Ass'n v. Garland Independent School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Rockwell International Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Amphastar Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Aventis Pharma SACourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- State ex rel. Standard Elevator Co. v. West Bay Builders, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- USA ex rel INTL. BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS V. THE FAIRFIELD CO.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
- United States v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2022
- United States v. The Fidelity Deposit & Discount BankDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2025