United States and States of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, Ne et al v. Hind Health Care, Inc. et al

Filing 16

Order by Judge Lucy H. Koh Adopting 14 Report and Recommendation.. (lhklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/16/2017) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/18/2017: #***SEE AMENDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICATE AT ATTACHMENT 2*** (1) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE) (ofrS, COURT STAFF). (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/18/2017: # 2 AMENDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE) (ofr, COURT STAFF). Modified on 1/18/2017 (ofr, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15

UNITED STATES AND STATES OF
CALIFORNIA, COLORADO,
CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, FLORIDA,
GEORGIA, HAWAII, ILLINOIS,
INDIANA, IOWA, LOUISIANA,
MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS,
MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, MONTANA,
NEVADA, et al.,

16
17
18
19

Case No. 15-CV-04928-LHK
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
Re: Dkt. No. 14

Plaintiffs,
v.
HIND HEALTH CARE, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

20
21

Relators W. Christian Hoyer and Peggy Ryan (“Relators”) filed this qui tam action against

22

Hind Health Care, Inc. (“Hind”), Teikoku Seiyaku Co., Ltd. (“Teikoku”), Larry Caldwell, and

23

Bradley Galer (collectively, “Defendants”), on behalf of the states of California, Colorado,

24

Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland,

25

Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York,

26

North Carolina, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Washington

27

(collectively, “Plaintiff States”); the United States; and the District of Columbia for alleged

28

1
Case No. 15-LHK-04928
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

1

violation of the federal False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729, et seq., as well as the false claims

2

laws of each of the Plaintiff States and the District of Columbia. The case was referred to

3

Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd. The Plaintiff States, the District of Columbia, and the United

4

States have declined to intervene in the action. ECF Nos. 7, 10. Thus, Relators are currently

5

pursuing this action on behalf of the United States, the Plaintiff States, and the District of

6

Columbia.

7

Because the United States, the Plaintiff States, and the District of Columbia have declined

8

to intervene in this action, Judge Lloyd issued a Report and Recommendation on October 27, 2016

9

that recommended unsealing the case. Ordinarily, a Report and Recommendation is filed and
served on all parties. However, because the Report and Recommendation was filed under seal, the

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Report and Recommendation was not served on Defendants. Nevertheless, the Magistrate Judge’s

12

Report and Recommendation was filed on October 27, 2016, no objections have been filed, and

13

the time to file objections has expired. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2).

14

Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, as well as the record in this case, the

15

court finds that the Report and Recommendation is well-founded in fact and in law and, therefore,

16

adopts the Report and Recommendation. In conformity with the Report and Recommendation, the

17

Court makes the following rulings:

18

1. In accordance with the terms of the Maryland False Health Claims Act, Md. Code

19

Ann., Health Gen, § 2-604(a)(7), the State of Maryland having declined to

20

intervene in this matter, all claims asserted on behalf of the State of Maryland are

21

hereby dismissed without prejudice.

22

2. The parties shall serve all pleadings and motions filed in this action, including

23

supporting memoranda, upon the United States, the Plaintiff States, and the District

24

of Columbia in accordance with 31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(3) and the Certificate of

25

Service attached to the States’ Notice of Election to Decline Intervention, ECF No.

26

10. The United States, the Plaintiff States, and the District of Columbia may order

27

any deposition transcripts and are entitled to intervene in this action, for good

28

2
Case No. 15-LHK-04928
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

1

cause, at any time;

2

3. The parties shall serve all notices of appeal upon the United States;

3

4. Relators shall send all orders of this Court to the United States, the Plaintiff States,

4
5

and the District of Columbia;
5. Should Relators or Defendants propose that this action be dismissed, settled, or

6

otherwise discontinued, the Court will provide the United States with notice and an

7

opportunity to be heard before ruling or granting its approval;

8

6. Should Relators or Defendants propose that this action on behalf of any of the
Plaintiff States and/or the District of Columbia be dismissed, settled, or otherwise

10

discontinued, Relators shall solicit and submit to the Court the written consent of

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

9

each of the Plaintiff States and the District of Columbia before filing such proposal

12

so that the Court may consider said consent(s) before ruling or granting its

13

approval;

14

7. Any dismissal of this action, or any part of this action, shall be without prejudice as

15

to any of the Plaintiff States and the District of Columbia, unless the state and/or

16

the District of Columbia consents to dismissal with prejudice;

17

8. The Relators’ complaint, ECF No. 1, the Order Setting Initial Case Management

18

Conference and ADR Deadlines, ECF No. 2, the United States’ and the Plaintiff

19

States’/District of Columbia’s notices of election to decline intervention, ECF Nos.

20

7, 9–10, the Report and Recommendation of Judge Howard Lloyd, ECF No. 14,

21

and the Order Reassigning Case, ECF No. 15, shall be unsealed as of January 16,

22

2017 and served upon Defendants.

23

9. The Clerk’s Notice regarding the Deadline for Consent or Declination to Proceed

24

Before a United States Magistrate Judge, ECF No. 11, and the forms regarding

25

Consent/Declination to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge, ECF Nos. 12–13, shall

26

be unsealed as of January 16, 2017.

27
28

10. The seal of this matter shall be lifted as to all other matters occurring in this action
3
Case No. 15-LHK-04928
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

1
2

after January 16, 2017.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

3
4
5
6

Dated: January 16, 2017
______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
Case No. 15-LHK-04928
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION