United States of America v. Mobile Medical Examination Services Inc ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. ) Case No. SA CV 13-1348 FMO (SHx) ANITA SILINGO, ) 12 ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER DISMISSING ACTION 13 ) v. ) 14 ) MOBILE MEDICAL EXAMINATION ) 15 SERVICES, INC., et al. ) ) 16 Defendants. ) ) 17 18 Pursuant to the Stipulation of Dismissal of Defendants, and Consent of the United States 19 of America to Dismissal (Dkt. 238), which seeks dismissal of the action pursuant to Rule 41(a) of 20 the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(1) of the False Claims Act, IT IS 21 ORDERED that all claims for relief in this action against defendants are dismissed. The claims 22 are dismissed: (1) with prejudice as to Relator; (2) with prejudice as to the United States of 23 America (“Government”) only with respect to claims against defendants for violations of the False 24 Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733, based on the alleged conduct by defendants with MedXM 25 stated in paragraph 77 of the Fourth Amended Complaint (Dkt. 188) between January 1, 2010 and 26 December 31, 2014; and (3) without prejudice as to the Government as to all else in the Fourth 27 Amended Complaint. 28 1 The court will not retain jurisdiction to enforce any provision of the settlement. See 2 Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 381-82, 114 S.Ct. 1673, 1677 (1994). 3 However, the court will retain jurisdiction to determine, if necessary, any proceedings pursuant to 4 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d)(2). 5 Dated this 18th day of December, 2020. 6 7 /s/ Fernando M. Olguin 8 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28