Reynolds v. Colvin

Filing 28

DECISION AND ORDER denying 15 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; granting 17 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings (ECF No. 17) is GRANTED and Commissioner� 39;s motion for judgment on the pleadings (ECF No. 15) is DENIED. This case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 9/4/2020) (kv) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.

Case 7:15-cv-00812-LMS Document 28 Filed 09/04/20 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 9/4/2020

Plaintiff,
-againstSPECTRUM PAINTING CORP., and TOWER
MAINTENANCE CORP.,

19 Civ. 2096 (AT)

ORDER

Defendants.
ANALISA TORRES, United States District Judge:
On August 25, 2020, the Court denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Government’s
claims under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq. MTD Order, ECF No. 62.
On August 28, 2020, Defendant Tower Maintenance Corp. (“Tower”) requested leave to move for
an order certifying for immediate appeal, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), the question of whether
an FCA plaintiff must show that the Government suffered actual damages in order to prevail. ECF
No. 65; see MTD Order at 27 (“The Court agrees with those courts that have found that an FCA
plaintiff need not show actual damages to the Government, so long as there is some direct impact
on the federal treasury.” (internal quotation marks, citations, and alterations omitted)). Having
reviewed the parties’ pre-motion letters, ECF Nos. 65 and 66, Tower’s request is DENIED. The
Court does not believe that the issue raised by Tower is “a controlling question of law as to which
there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order
may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.” 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
Tower also seeks leave to file a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s order. In
accordance with Paragraph III(A) of the Court’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases, Defendants
need not seek leave to move for reconsideration.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 4, 2020
New York, New York