Carl Schroeder v. United States

Good Law
2015 D.A.R. 8198·793 F.3d 1080·2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 12287
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 16, 201513-35479California2,963 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hawkins, J.

Carl Schroeder (“Schroeder”) appeals his dismissal from a qui tam suit concerning the billing practices of government contractor CH2M Hill. The appeal turns on an issue of first impression: Does 31 U.S.C. § 3730 (d)(3) of the False Claims Act (“FCA”) require the dismissal of a qui (J|am relator convicted of the conduct giving rise to the fraud, even if he or she only played a minor role? We hold that the statute does require such a relator to be dismissed and affirm the district court.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Schroeder worked for CH2M Hill, a contractor for the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) as a Radiological Control Technician from January 2002 to February 2003 and then again from May 2004 to October 2008. During this time, CH2M Hill engaged in widespread fraudulent billing of hourly work.

Schroeder, like many of his colleagues, submitted false time cards, and, as a result, received at least $50,000 for falsely claimed overtime hours. In April 2008, the DOE Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) learned of the time card fraud from an anonymous source and began investigating. OIG investigators interviewed Schroeder’s colleagues in November 2008. Several of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.