United States of America et al v. Institute of Cardiovascular Excellence, PLLC et al

Filing 94

ORDER -- the Court declines to stay the Instant Action; the Instant Action will proceed as set forth in the Court's Case Management and Scheduling Order (Doc. 65). Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 4/26/2016. (VMF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel.
ROBERT A. GREEN; STATE OF
FLORIDA ex rel. HOLLY TAYLOR,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No. 5:11-cv-406-Oc-37TBS

INSTITUTE OF CARDIOVASCULAR
EXCELLENCE, PLLC; ICE HOLDINGS,
PLLC; ASAD ULLAH QAMAR; and
HUMERA A. QAMAR,
Defendants.
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the following:
1.

Amended Suggestion of Bankruptcy (Doc. 90), filed April 21, 2016; and

2.

United States’ Response to Defendants’ Amended Suggestion of
Bankruptcy and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. 91), filed April 22,
2016.

Defendants in this False Claims Act (“FCA”) qui tam action (“Instant Action”) have
filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. (See Doc. 90); see also In re Asad U. Qamar & Humera
A. Qamar, 3:16-bk-1490 (M.D. Fla. 2016); In re Institute of Cardiovascular Excellence,
PLLC, 3:16-bk-1491 (M.D. Fla. 2016); In re ICE Holdings, PLLC, 3:16-bk-1492 (M.D. Fla.
2016). As such, Defendants filed a “Suggestion of Bankruptcy” with this Court, indicating
their belief that the Instant Action is automatically stayed pursuant to the Bankruptcy
Code’s automatic stay provision, 11 U.S.C. § 362(a). (Doc. 90.) The United States

opposes a stay. (See Doc. 91.)
Ordinarily, a petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy operates as a stay of an action
against the debtor (“Automatic Stay”). See 11 U.S.C. § 362(a). Particular actions are
exempt from the Automatic Stay. See id. § 362(b). In the absence of binding authority,
the Court finds persuasive the rational that exempts FCA actions from the Automatic Stay
through the point of entry of judgment. See In re Commonwealth Cos., Inc., 913 F.2d 518,
527 (8th Cir. 1990); see also In re Bilzerian, 146 B.R. 871, 873 (M.D. Fla. 1992). That is,
the Court can permit the action to proceed to the entry of a final monetary judgment
against the debtor, but it cannot enforce that judgment. See In re Commonwealth Cos.,
Inc., 913 F.2d at 527; In re Bilzerian, 146 B.R. at 873.
Accordingly, the Court declines to stay the Instant Action; the Instant Action will
proceed as set forth in the Court’s Case Management and Scheduling Order (Doc. 65).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on April 26, 2016.

Copies:
Counsel of Record

2