Eric Stenson v. Radiology Limited Plc

facts alleged.” UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Shelter Cap. Partners, LLC, 718 F.3d

1006, 1014 (9th Cir. 2013) (internal punctuation omitted) (quoting Balistreri v.

Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988)).

Because the FAC alleges fraud, Stenson must also plead claims with requisite

“particularity under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b).” Winter ex rel. United

States v. Gardens Reg’l Hosp. & Med. Ctr., Inc., 953 F.3d 1108, 1116 (9th Cir. 2020)

(internal punctuation omitted). That is, it must “state with particularity the

circumstances constituting fraud or mistake, including the who, what, when, where,

and how of the misconduct charged.” Ebeid ex rel. United States v. Lungwitz, 616

F.3d 993, 998 (9th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted).

While Stenson need not “allege the details of every false claim submitted to the

federal government for reimbursement,” United States ex rel. Solis v. Millennium

Pharms., Inc., 885 F.3d 623, 628–29 (9th Cir. 2018), any allegations made on

“information and belief” must state the factual basis for such belief, Neubronner v.

Milken, 6 F.3d 666, 672 (9th Cir. 1993). When read together, Rules 8(a)…