Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
792 F.3d 1121 *; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11643 **; 40 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 483
UNITED STATES EX REL. STEVEN J. HARTPENCE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KINETIC CONCEPTS, INC.; KCI-USA, INC., Defendants-Appellees.UNITED STATES EX REL. GERALDINE GODECKE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KINETIC CONCEPTS, INC.; KCI-USA, INC., Defendants-Appellees.
Subsequent History: Motion granted by, Stay granted by United States ex rel. Godecke v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6042 (C.D. Cal., Jan. 8, 2018)
Prior History: [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. D.C. No. 2:08-cv-01885-GHK-AGR, D.C. No. 2:08-cv-06403-GHK-AGR. George H. King, Chief District Judge, Presiding.
United States ex rel. Godecke v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190695 (C.D. Cal., Jan. 30, 2012)United States ex rel. Hartpence v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190690 (C.D. Cal., Jan. 30, 2012)
allegations, original source, district court, public disclosure, first-to-file, qui tam, complaints, therapy, contracts, wound, independent knowledge, reimbursement, whistleblower, publicly, qualify, modifier, material fact, fraudulent, radar, statutory language, hand-in-the-public-disclosure, submitting, intervene, Aircraft, misusing, overrule, costs
Labor & Employment Law, False Claims Act, Scope & Definitions, Original Source, Qui Tam Actions, Civil Procedure, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Jurisdiction Over Actions, General Overview, Jurisdictional Bar, Governments, Courts, Judicial Precedent, Retaliation, Statutory Application, False Claims Act, Public Health & Welfare Law, Providers, Reimbursement, Appeals, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Legislation, Interpretation, Clearly Erroneous Review, Questions of Fact & Law, Evidence, Presumptions, Particular Presumptions, Regularity