(PS) Martello v. Lee

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. No. 2:17–cv–1468–MCE–KJN PS

JEANNETTE MARTELLO,

12 ORDER Plaintiff/Relator, 13 (ECF No. 31) v. 14 PETER LEE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 18 In July 2017, plaintiff/relator1 brought this qui tam action on behalf of the United States 19 under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733. (ECF No. 1.) On August 6, 2020, 20 the government filed its notice of election to decline intervention pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 21 § 3730(b)(4)(B). (ECF No. 21.) On October 14, 2020, given the government’s election not to 22 intervene, relator filed a Request for Dismissal Without Prejudice, requesting that this case be 23 dismissed without prejudice. (ECF No. 31.) The FCA provides that a qui tam action “may be 24 dismissed only if the court and the Attorney General give written consent to the dismissal and 25 their reasons for consenting.” 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(1). The Ninth Circuit has held that this 26 consent provision only applies…