USA ex rel Blyn v. Triumph Group et al
Filing
83
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 82 Motion for Reconsideration of 80 Order Certifying Interlocutory Appeal and Granting Stay. Signed by Judge Dale A. Kimball on 6/28/2016. (eat)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
CENTRAL DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel.
JOE BLYN, DONALD LITTLE, and
KUROSH MOTAGHED,
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER
Plaintiffs,
vs.
TRIUMPH GROUP, INC.; TRIUMPH
GEAR SYSTEMS, INC.; JEFF FRISBY;
and CARLA BOWMAN,
Case No. 2:12-CV-922-DAK
Defendants.
This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs Donald Little and Kurosh Motaghed’s Motion
for Reconsideration of Order Certifying Interlocutory Appeal and Granting Stay. On June 23,
2016, the court issued a Memorandum Decision and Order allowing Defendant Triumph Gear
Systems, Inc. (“TGS”) to file a petition for permission to appeal to the United States Court of
Appeals for the Tenth Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) and staying the case pending a
decision by the Tenth Circuit. Plaintiffs argue that a June 27, 2016, decision by the United States
Supreme Court resolves the split in the circuit courts regarding the False Claim Act’s (“FCA’s”)
first-to-file bar and removes any bona fide reason to permit an interlocutory appeal. The
Supreme Court decision referenced by Plaintiffs is a decision to deny certiorari in a D.C. Circuit
case, which held that the FCA first-to-file rule is not jurisdictional. See U.S. ex rel. Heath v.
AT&T, Inc., 791 F.3d 112, 119 (D.C. Cir. 2015), cert. denied, No. 15-363, 2016 WL 3461577
(June 27, 2016).
Despite Plaintiffs arguments to the contrary, the Supreme Court’s decision to deny
certiorari did not resolve the split in the circuit courts regarding whether the FCA’s first-to-file
1
bar is jurisdictional. Although the decision by the Supreme Court to deny certiorari did leave the
decision of the D.C. Circuit in place, the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari did not affect
decisions in other circuits, such as the decision by the Tenth Circuit finding that the FCA’s firstto-file bar is jurisdictional. See Grynberg v. Koch Gateway Pipeline Co., 390 F.3d 1276, 1278
(10th Cir. 2004). Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision to deny certiorari does not change the
court’s analysis regarding whether the issue is appropriate for interlocutory appeal.
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for
Reconsideration of Order Certifying Interlocutory Appeal and Granting Stay is DENIED.
DATED this 28th day of June, 2016.
BY THE COURT:
_________________________________________
DALE A. KIMBALL
United States District Judge
2
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?