Rodriguez v. Our Lady Lourdes Med ( 2009 )

Opinions of the United
2009 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
1-13-2009
Rodriguez v. Our Lady Lourdes Med
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential
Docket No. 06-5207
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2009
Recommended Citation
"Rodriguez v. Our Lady Lourdes Med" (2009). 2009 Decisions. Paper 1962.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2009/1962
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2009 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 06-5207
RENEE RODRIGUEZ; BARBARA KING, In the Name of the United
States Government Pursuant to the False Claims Act, 31
U.S.C. Section 3730, and Individually Pursuant to the New
Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act
Appellants
v.
OUR LADY OF LOURDES MEDICAL CENTER
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of New Jersey
(D.C. Civil Action No. 06-cv-00129)
District Judge: Honorable Robert B. Kugler
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
December 1, 2008
Before: AMBRO, WEIS, and VAN ANTWERPEN, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed December 30, 2008)
ORDER AMENDING PRECEDENTIAL OPINION
AMBRO, Circuit Judge
IT IS NOW ORDERED that the published Opinion in the above case filed December
30, 2008, be amended as follows:
On pages 11–12, starting at the fourth line from the bottom, replace
As such, we will uphold the District Court’s dismissal only if,
accepting “all well pleaded factual allegations as true and
draw[ing] all reasonable inferences from such allegations in
favor of the complainant,” it is clear that Rodriguez and King
cannot prove a set of facts that would entitle them to relief.
Worldcom, Inc. v. Graphnet, Inc., 343 F.3d 651, 653 (3d Cir.
2003).
with
As such, we “accept all factual allegations as true, construe the
complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and
determine whether, under any reasonable reading of the
complaint, the plaintiff may be entitled to relief.” Id. at 233
(quoting Pinker v. Roche Holdings Ltd., 292 F.3d 361, 374 n.7
(3d Cir. 2002)).
By the Court,
/s/ Thomas L. Ambro, Circuit Judge
Dated: January 13, 2009
tmm/cc: Ross Begelman, Esq.
Brian P. Flaherty, Esq.
Gregory A. Lomax, Esq.
Stuart A. Minkowitz, Esq.
Marc M. Orlow, Esq.
Drew A. Wixted, Esq.
2