Palchikovskiy
Palchikovskiy v. Oregon Health Sciences University
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Victor Palchikovskiy appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his qui tarn action filed under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 (“FCA”), and the summary judgment for defendants on his claims of retaliatory termination in violation of the FCA and state law, defamation and interference with economic relationship. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo dismissals pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b) and 12(b)(6), see United States ex rel. Lee v. Smith-Kline Beecham, Inc., 245 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir.2001), and the grant of summary judgment, United States ex rel. Hochman v. Nachman, 145 F.3d 1069 , 1072 (9th Cir. 1998). We affirm.
Because Palchikovskiy failed either to allege that Oregon Health Sciences University (“OHSU”) engaged in fraud, or to provide statements regarding the time, place, and nature of alleged fraudulent activities in other FCA claims, the district court properly dismissed Palchikovskiy’s FCA claims. See United States ex rel. Hopper v. Anton, 91 F.3d 1261, 1266 (9th Cir.1996); United, States ex rel. Lee, 245 F.3d at 1051-52 (holding that FCA complaints must comply with Rule 9(b) requirements mandating that…