Bruzzone et al v. Intel Corporation et al

Filing 18

ORDER SETTING DEADLINE TO SERVE DEFENDANT INTEL CORPORATION AND REQUESTING RESPONSE FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. Signed by Judge Alsup on January 16, 2014. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/16/2014) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/16/2014: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (dt, COURT STAFF). (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/16/2014: # 2 Certificate/Proof of Service) (dt, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 No. C 13-03729 WHA United States, ex rel. Michael A. Bruzzone, as Relator Original Source, 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 BRINGING THIS ACTION ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, c/o MELINDA HAAG, United States Attorney Northern District of California And c/o ERIC HOLDER United States Attorney General United States Department of Justice, Plaintiffs, 19 20 21 ORDER SETTING DEADLINE TO SERVE DEFENDANT INTEL CORPORATION AND REQUESTING RESPONSE FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL v. INTEL CORPORATION, DELL, INC., and INTERNATIONAL DATA GROUP, 22 Defendants. 23 / 24 On August 12, 2013, Michael A. Bruzzone filed this qui tam false claims act action. On 25 October 22, the United States provided notice of its decision not to intervene. Section 26 3730(b)(1) of Title 31 of the United States Code states: 27 28 A person may bring a civil action for a violation of section 3729 for the person and for the United States Government. The action shall be brought in the name of the Government. The action may be dismissed only if the court and the Attorney General give written consent to the dismissal and their reasons for consenting. 1 Section 3730(c)(3) states: 2 If the Government elects not to proceed with the action, the person who initiated the action shall have the right to conduct the action . . . . When a person proceeds with the action, the court, without limiting the status and rights of the person initiating the action, may nevertheless permit the Government to intervene at a later date upon a showing of good cause. 3 4 5 An October 29 order stated that the “realtor shall serve the Complaint on defendants.” 6 Plaintiff’s case management statement, dated January 10, states that “[t]he Summons and 7 Complaint have not yet been served on Defendants.” At least twice, plaintiff has stated that “he 8 is not in the financial position to fund this action without government intervention” so the 9 undersigned judge finds it challenging to see how this action could proceed (Dkt. Nos. 11, 17). United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 Plaintiff, however, states that he expects to file an amended complaint to “simplify the 11 allegations, and to delete all defendants except Intel” (Dkt. No. 17). 12 Accordingly, the Attorney General shall file a written statement by NOON ON 13 FEBRUARY 6 regarding consent to dismissal (Dkt. No. 9). 14 Plaintiff has until FEBRUARY 26 to amend and serve defendant Intel Corporation. 15 Within two calendar days of service and no later than NOON ON FEBRUARY 28, plaintiff shall 16 file a statement (appending the relevant proof of service) regarding service. The statement shall 17 address whether plaintiff is able to and will proceed in this action. All parties are on notice that 18 if the Attorney General consents to dismissal in compliance with 31 U.S.C. 3730(b)(1) and Intel 19 Corporation is not properly served by February 26, the action will be dismissed without further 20 notice. 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 24 Dated: January 16, 2014. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 25 26 27 28 2

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?