Knudsen v. Belt Valley Bank

Filing 7

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 in full. Plaintiff Lloyd Knudsen's Complaint, 2 , is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Donald W. Molloy on 3/3/2014. Mailed to Knudsen. (TAG, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA

GREAT FALLS DIVISION

LLOYD KNUDSEN,

CV 13-102-GF-DWM

Plaintiff,
vs.

ORDER

BELT VALLEY BANK,
Defendant.

The Findings and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge
Keith Strong are now before the Court. (Doc. 5.) Judge Strong recommends
Plaintiff Lloyd Knudsen's Complaint be dismissed without prejudice. (Id. at 6.)
Knudsen timely filed his Objections on February 21, 2014. (Doc. 6.)
When a party objects to any portion of Findings and Recommendations
issued by a Magistrate Judge, the district court must make a de novo determination
when reviewing that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach. Inc., 656
F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir.1981). The Court notes that Knudsen's Objections do
not specifically address any of the contentions of Judge Strong's Findings and
Recommendations. For that reason, Judge Strong's report is reviewed de novo in
-1­

its entirety and detennined as follows.
Judge Strong's Findings and Recommendations are well-reasoned and will
be adopted in full. Knudsen brings this qui tam action pro se under the False
Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq.
The [False Claims Act] does not authorize a relator to prosecute a
§ 3729 violation pro se . . . . "Given the fact that Congress did not
expressly authorize a qui tam relator to proceed pro se when acting
on behalf of the United States, it 'must have had in mind that such a
suit would be carried on in accordance with the established procedure
which requires that only one licensed to practice law may conduct
proceedings in court for anyone other than himself."

Stoner v. Santa Clara Co.

Off. ofEduc., 502 F 3d 1116, 1127 (9th Cir. 2007)

(quoting United States v. Onan, 190 F.2d 1,6 (8th Cir. 1951)). Based on this
binding authority, Judge Strong finds Knudsen cannot proceed with this action,
regardless of its basis in law or fact, as he lacks representation by a licensed
attorney and recommends the Complaint be dismissed without prejudice. (Doc. 5
at 5-6.) Knudsen's Objections simply restate his claim for relief and rejoin neither
this fmding nor this recommendation. (Doc. 6.)
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Judge Strong's Findings and
Recommendations, (Doc. 5), are ADOPTED IN FULL.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Lloyd Knudsen's Complaint,
(Doc. 2), is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court shall close
-2­

this case.
DATED this

.b~ay of March, 2014.
oy, District Judge

istrict Court

-3­