Bennett v. Biotronik, Inc. et al
Filing
62
ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 5/29/14: The Complaint and Amended Complaints in this action are dismissed without prejudice. (Kaminski, H)
1 CLAIRE M. SYLVIA (State Bar No. 138990)
cms@pcsf.com
2 PHILLIPS & COHEN LLP
100 The Embarcadero, Suite 300
3 San Francisco, California 94105
Tel: (415) 836-9000
4 Fax: (415) 836-9001
5 PETER CHATFIELD
peter@phillipsandcohen.com
6 PHILLIPS & COHEN LLP
2000 Massachusetts Avenue
7 Washington, DC 20036
Tel: (202) 833-4567
8 Fax: (202) 833-1815
9 L. TIMOTHY TERRY, admitted pro hac vice
tim@theterrylawfirm.com
10 THE TERRY LAW FIRM LTD.
P.O. Box 2348
11 Carson City, NV 89702
Tel: (775) 883-2348
12 Fax: (775) 883-2347
13 Attorneys for Qui Tam Plaintiff/Relator Max Bennett
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; THE STATES 2:10-CV-01273-KJM-EFB
16 OF CALIFORNIA, COLORADO,
CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, FLORIDA,
ORDER
17 GEORGIA, HAWAII, ILLINOIS, INDIANA,
LOUISIANA, MICHIGAN, MASSACHUSETTS,
18 MONTANA, NEVADA, NEW HAMPSHIRE,
NEW JERSEY, NEW MEXICO, NEW YORK,
19 NORTH CAROLINA, OKLAHOMA, RHODE
ISLAND, TENNESSEE, TEXAS, VIRGINIA,
20 WISCONSIN, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
AND DOE STATES 1-23, ex rel. MAX
21 BENNETT,
22
Plaintiffs,
vs.
BIOTRONIK, INC., WESTERN MEDICAL,
24 INC., CAESAR FONTE, AND PETER ELIA,
ROBERT N. BERKELEY, LEON FELDMAN,
25 W. JUDSON FISHER, ARJUN V. GURURAJ,
MONTY C. MORALES, WILLIAM H. RESH,
26 ROBERT C. WESLEY, AND NEVADA HEART
AND VASCULAR CENTER, LLP,
27
Defendants.
28
23
1
2
ORDER
UPON CONSIDERATION of qui tam Plaintiff-Relator Max Bennett’s “Notice of
3 Voluntary Dismissal” and the files and records in this case, it is hereby ORDERED that:
4
The Complaint and Amended Complaints in this action are dismissed without prejudice.
5
6 DATED: May 29, 2014.
7
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?