Kurnik et al v. Amgen Inc et al
ORDER denying 124 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying 125 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim in Amended Complaint. Signed by Honorable Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. on 07/23/2014.(bshr, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
United States of America, et al., ex rel
C/A No. 3:11-cv-01464-JFA
Pharmerica Corp; and Kindred Healthcare Inc,
Both Defendants have moved this court to dismiss the amended complaint in this qui tam
action pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6) and FRCP 9(b). ECF Nos. 124, 125. The court has carefully
reviewed the complaint and briefs in this matter. Because of the thorough nature of the briefs
and this court’s familiarity with the pleading standards in qui tam actions,1 the court has
determined that oral argument will not aid the court in the decisional process. Therefore, the
CLERK is directed to cancel the hearing set by ECF No. 145.
The court has concluded that Relator has sufficiently pleaded his claims to survive
Defendants’ motions to dismiss on all causes of action. Thus, both ECF No. 124 and ECF No.
125 are DENIED in their entirety.2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
July 23, 2014
Columbia, South Carolina
Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge
This court has before it several pending qui tam actions, and has recently disposed of motions to dismiss in those
The court is withholding judgment on the effect of the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act in this case,
pending the outcome of United States ex rel. Carter v. Haliburton Co., 710 F.3d 171 (4th Cir. 2013), cert. granted,
82 U.S.L.W. 3010, (U.S. Jul. 1, 2014) (No. 12-1497).
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?