Opinion ID: 161558
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: District Court's Order Dismissing on Res Judicata Grounds

Text: Considering first the challenge to its subject matter jurisdiction, the district court found the proposed second amended complaint to have sufficiently alleged that Dr. King had direct and independent knowledge of the defendants' fraudulent schemes and had gained this knowledge from his own efforts and personal observations. A plaintiff claiming to be an original source also must allege that he voluntarily provided the relevant information to the federal government prior to filing the qui tam suit. With respect to this pleading requirement, the district court concluded: Because the defendants have not contested King's allegation that he did voluntarily provide the information prior to filing this lawsuit, the Court finds for purposes of Rule 12(b)(6) that King has sufficiently alleged that he is an original source of the information and that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over his claims. (II Aplt. App. at 324). Turning away the subject matter jurisdiction challenge, the district court granted the motions to dismiss on res judicata grounds finding an identity of causes of action in King I and the qui tam suit. The district court also denied Dr. King's motion to amend on futility grounds.