Legal Document

127 S. Ct. 1397 (2007) ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP. et al. v. UNITED STATES No. 05-1272. Supreme Court of United States. Argued December 5, 2006. Decided March 27, 2007. *1401 Maureen E. Mahoney, for Petitioner. Maria T. Vullo, Respondent James Stone. Malcolm L. Stewart, Washington, DC, the Christopher J. Koenigs, Michael B. Carroll, Sherman & Howard L.L.C., Denver, CO, Scott Ballenger, Matthew K. Roskoski, Barry Blonien, Nathan H. Seltzer, Latham Watkins LLP, Petitioners. Hartley David Alley, Law Offices D. Lakewood, Evan Norris, Doris F. Bernhardt, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton Garrison New York, NY, Attorneys Paul Clement, Solicitor General, Peter Keisler, Assistant Attorney Edwin Kneedler, Deputy to Douglas N. Letter, R. Maier, Granston, D.C., Justice SCALIA delivered opinion Court. The False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733, eliminates federal-court jurisdiction over actions under § 3730 Act that are based upon public disclosure allegations or transactions "unless action is brought by General person bringing an original source information." 3730(e)(4)(A). We decide whether respondent Stone was source. I mixture concrete and pond sludge subject this case has taken nearly two decades seep, so speak, into Given long history complexity litigation, it well describe facts in some detail. A From 1975 through 1989, petitioner Rockwell International Corp. a management operating contract with Department Energy (DOE) run Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant Colorado. most significant portion Rockwell's compensation came form semiannual "`award fee,'" amount which depended on DOE's evaluation performance number areas, including environmental, safety, health concerns. States ex rel. Int'l, Corp., 92 Fed. Appx. 708, 714 (C.A.10 2004). November 1980 1986, worked as engineer at plant. In early 1980's, explored possibility disposing toxic accumulated solar evaporation ponds facility, mixing cement. idea pour large rectangular boxes, where would solidify "pondcrete" blocks could be stored onsite transported other sites disposal. reviewed proposed manufacturing process pondcrete 1982. He concluded proposal "would not work," App. 175, communicated conclusion *1402 written "Engineering Order." As later explain, he believed "the suggested result unstable deteriorate cause unwanted release wastes environment." Ibid. because "foresaw piping system" extracted from properly remove lead inadequate sludge/waste cement such `pond crete' rapidly disintegrate thus creating additional contamination problems." Id., 290. Notwithstanding Stone's prediction, proceeded its project successfully manufactured "concrete hard" during period employment Flats. It only after laid off 1986 what parties have called "insolid" were discovered. According respondents, knew October substantial insolid, but DOE did become aware problem until May 1988, when several began leak, leading discovery thousands insolid blocks. media reported these discoveries, 3 Appellants' Nos. 99-1351, 99-1352, 99-1353 (CA10), pp. 889-38 889-39; attributed malfunction reduction ratio mixture. June 1987, more than year had left employ, went Federal Bureau Investigation (FBI) environmental crimes time his employment. court below, alleged "contrary knowledge, accepted hazardous waste facilities; employees `forbidden discussing any controversies front employee'; although Flats' fluid bed incinerators failed testing 1981, pilot incinerator remained line used incinerate daily since plutonium then sent out burial; distilled fractionated various oils solvents geared incineration; ground water contaminated previous burial land application, lagoons tended overflow `a good rain,' causing discharged without first being treated." Pet. Cert. 4a. provided FBI 2,300 pages documents, buried among 1982 engineering report predicting pondcrete-system design work. discuss their conversations.[1] Based part information allegedly learned Stone, Government obtained search warrant Flats, 6, 75 Environmental Protection Agency agents raided facility. affidavit support included (1) "due waste-concrete mixture," 429, (2) award fees "`excellent'" id., 98, (3) *1403 made false statements concealed material violation Resource Conservation Recovery 1976 (RCRA), 90 Stat. 2811, 42 6928, 18 1001. Newspapers published allegations. 1992, pleaded guilty 10 violations, knowing storage RCRA. agreed pay $18.5 million fines. B July filed qui tam suit Act.[2] That prohibits fraudulent claims payment States, 3729(a), authorizes civil remedy fraud 3730(a), private individuals Government's name, 3730(b)(1). provides, however, "[n]o shall section ... news media, unless An "original source" "an individual who direct independent knowledge voluntarily before filing 3730(e)(4)(B). complaint required comply certain federal state laws regulations, RCRA; committed numerous violations regulations throughout 1980's[3]; that, order induce make payments approvals contract, knowingly presented 3729(a). seal simultaneously confidential statement describing "substantially all evidence information" possession, 3730(b)(2). identified 26 safety issues, one involved pondcrete. With respect issue, explained system foreseen mechanism sludge, turn moved dismiss lack subject-matter *1404 jurisdiction, arguing publicly disclosed District denied motion because, view, "Stone linked compliance deficient continue receive payments." 61a. initially declined intervene action, reversed course, 1996, granted intervention. Several weeks later, suggestion Court, joint amended complaint. relevant here, violated RCRA storing leaky blocks, allege defect (as predicted Stone) caused pondcrete.[4] Respondents clarified even further became final pretrial superseded earlier pleadings. This said pondcrete's insolidity due incorrect cement/sludge operations, controls inspection procedures." 470. continued: "During winter replaced foreman, Norman Fryback, Ron Teel. Teel increased production rates by, things, reducing added Following 23, 1988 spill, acknowledged reduced cement-to-sludge major contributor existence insufficiently solid pads." 476-477. again mention asserted years earlier. Respondents' trial 1999. None witnesses having testified trial. And none documents introduced Nor respondents To contrary, closing arguments both counsel repeatedly jury new foreman insufficient effort increase production. verdict divided count different corresponding award-fee periods. found favor three periods covering (April 1, September 30, 1988), remaining awarded damages $1,390,775.80, trebled pursuant postverdict 3730(e)(4), response, *1405 successful allegations, original-source status. Appeals Tenth Circuit affirmed part, remanded determine 3730(e)(4)(B) required. On remand, produced Government, communicate also carried burden proving orally informed about suit. appeal, disagreed Court's held (over dissent Judge Briscoe) sufficed carry persuasion. Fed.Appx. 708. certiorari, 548 U.S. ___, 35, 165 Ed. 2d 1013 (2006), II Section 3730(e)(4)(A) provides criminal, civil, administrative hearing, congressional, administrative, Accounting Office report, audit, investigation, (Footnote omitted.) discussed above, defines [1] [2] comes conceded prevailed within meaning question qualified exception public-disclosure bar. begin little analysis case, asserts responds no thing done so, concession been irrelevant 3730(e)(4) jurisdictional. agree latter proposition. true enough word "jurisdiction" does every context connote jurisdiction. Noting "`a many, too meanings,'" we Steel Co. Citizens Better Environment, 523 83, 118 1003, 140 210 (1998), establishing elements offense jurisdictional matter merely statute phrased providing suits. 90, 1003 (quoting Vanness, 85 F.3d 661, 663, n. 2 (C.A.D.C.1996)). Here, issue casting creation terms somehow limits general grant normally brought, rather clear explicit withdrawal withdraws undoubtedly so. Just last Term stated "[i]f Legislature clearly states threshold limitation statute's scope jurisdictional, courts litigants will duly instructed *1406 wrestle issue." Arbaugh Y H 546 500, 515-516, 126 1235, 163 1097 (2006) (footnote omitted). Here nature requirement visceribus verborum. Indeed, already speaks power particular court" substantive rights parties." Hughes Aircraft Schumer, 520 939, 951, 117 1871, 138 135 (1997). contrary position rests entirely dicta single decision, see Fallon Accudyne 97 937, 940-941 (C.A.7 1996). thought cases conferred 28 1331 1345 (the federal-question United-States-as-plaintiff provisions Judicial Code) 3732(a) provision venue conferring related state-law claims), 3730, "section" referenced 3730(e)(4). eliminate believed, those jurisdiction-conferring sections referenced. know nothing logic authority this. jurisdiction-removing here say "no section," section." surely natural way achieve desired eliminating category actionsrather listing conceivable Code whose conferral eliminated. (In addition cited court, might diversity-jurisdiction provision, 1332, supplemental-jurisdiction 1367.) next observed bar may speak if anyone gets financial reward, "categories disputes resolved (a real `jurisdictional' limit)." F.3d, 941. But classic begging question, precisely there removed courts' consisting suits relator information. Nothing prevents Congress defining "category" excluded manner wishes. See, e.g., 1500 (no "any claim plaintiff pending against States"). Lastly, similar reference Norris-LaGuardia 29 101, 104, remedies jurisdiction." 941 (citing Burlington Northern Maintenance Way Employees, 481 444-446, 107 1841, 95 381 (1987)). language fact similar. restraining temporary permanent injunction involving growing labor dispute...." 104 (emphasis added). facially relief can accorded, removal dispute." contrast, text says Whether point not, therefore, may, indeed must, *1407 met III status, "direct based." Because previously addressed preliminary questions require our attention. First, phrase "information based" refer relator's triggered based? former. See Brief Petitioners 26, 13; 24, 8; 15, 21. view must satisfy ourselves parties' correct. Though hardly free doubt,[5] "information" subparagraph (B) relators' based. with, standing own suggests disposition. based," "provid[e] Surely expect "provide underlying claims. Subparagraph (A) complicates matters. described earlier, bars "public transactions" If referred (B)'s requiring same "allegations" (A), status depend principal textual difficulty interpretation simply "allegations," "allegations transactions." Had wanted link disclosure, identical phrase, transactions"; reason transactions. sense offers strong interpretation. public. difficult understand why care knows allegation (e.g., told newspaper reporter *1408 pondcrete) supporting defective inevitably pondcrete). Not sense, raise nettlesome procedural problems, placing comparing often unknowable Where (by reason, example, reporter's desire protect source), presumably court. just underlies makes sense. lower following logic: term read tandem refers Laird Lockheed Martin Eng. Science Servs. Co., 336 346, 354 (C.A.5 2003). premise reasoning seems enough: means thing. minor premise, howeverthat transactions highly questionable. complete us likely (in light set forth above) few words to-wit, "based beginning provision. interpretation, same, viz., action. Having determined confront ambiguity: Which ones? changed course yet asks look argues stages litigation. limited includes (at minimum) amended. complaint" (or "complaint"), simpliciter. Absent 3730(e)(4)'s initial complaint, infer one. Such leave plead trivial theory amend include theories copied domain materials possession. Even concedes regarding fundamentally scheme reevaluation court's 40; Tr. Oral Arg. 40. *1409 rule "depends things brought," Mullan Torrance, 9 Wheat. 537, 539, 6 154 (1824), suggest originally synonymous; demonstration defeat Anderson Watt, 694, 701, 11 449, 34 1078 (1891); Morris Gilmer, 129 315, 326, 289, 32 690 (1889). So they others establish Thus, files amends Wellness Community-Nat. House, 70 46, 49 1995); Boelens Redman Homes, Inc., 759 F.2d 504, 508 1985).[6] prior pleadings "controll[ed] subsequent action," Rule Civ. Proc. 16(e). Curtis Loether, 415 189, 190, 94 1005, 39 260 (1974) (where order, "it never formally amended" Rules 15(b), 16)); Wilson Muckala, 303 1207, 1215 2002) ("[C]laims, defenses, waived appeared and, conversely, inclusion deemed claim"); Syrie Knoll 748 304, 308 1984) ("[I]ncorporation a[new] pre-trial [the new] claim"). circumstances, amendedhere, orderto objects approach risks driving wedge between relators. worries future relators decline "acquiesc[e]" tactical decision narrow relator. 44. policy concern valid, basis longer makes. IV Judged according principles falls short. ultimately (and hence ones inquiry pertinent outcome) one-and-a-half-year April 1988. *1410 claimed employed time, insolid; fail defect; leaked while on-site; storage. prediction flaw qualify knowledge" defect. Of misunderstanding occurred immaterial actually existed. failed; it. need address), assuredly do effect wrong. disproved acknowledged, able produce using machinery defective. respondents' foreman's counters spray-irrigation (which claim, 492) disagree. permit gross claim. We, along conclude smuggling. Merena SmithKline Beecham 205 97, 102 (C.A.3 2000); Hays Hoffman, 325 982, 990 (C.A.8 2003); Wang FMC 975 1412, 1415-1416, 1420 (C.A.9 1992). then-Judge Alito explained, "[t]he plaintiffs join her lawsuit should rescue doomed (e)(4) separate likewise, joinder dismissal otherwise survived." Beecham, supra, 102. based, second V contend test intervention permits "brought General." amendments unnecessary intervened, making "action *1411 General."[7] assuming reject respondents'"intervention" argument. contemplates types actions. finds violating 3729, bring person." Second, 3730(b), "[a] 3729 Government." When brings elect "proceed 3730(b)(4)(A), "declin[e] take right conduct 3730(b)(4)(B). draws sharp distinction 3730(a) 3730(b). intervenes elects action." elsewhere "proceed[ing] subsection (b)"  crystal oust Does cast doubt well? After all, was, source; neither. petitioners bizarre judgment aside. readily avoided, common be, holding person, joined, becomes once prerequisites outcome frequently cases, "courts appeals . cure dismissing dispensable nondiverse party." Grupo Dataflux Atlas Global Group, P., 541 567, 573, 124 1920, 158 866 (2004) Newman-Green, Inc. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 826, 837, 109 2218, 893 (1989)); EPA, 614 843, 845 1979) ("[T]here instances intervenor's rise fall party"); 7C C. Wright, A. Miller, M. Kane, Practice Procedure p. 491 (2d ed. 1986) ("[A]n intervenor proceed grounds What cured ruling characterization elimination leaves place pursued reasonably regarded *1412 "brought" him purposes * hold lacked enter reverse Circuit's contrary. ordered. BREYER took consideration case. STEVENS, whom GINSBURG joins, dissenting. Any citizen enforce domain. available, still sue ("No information"). believe misinterpreted actual prevail, respectfully dissent. my plain reading specifically, (original amended), source.[1] Moreover, use article "an," "the," indicates sole By majority's proven words, prevailing ante, 1409 (limiting "false jury"). supported statute, requires provide timely manner. focuses commenced. leads recovery, *1413 affect proper filing.[2] points out, facility lawsuit. Ante, 1402, 1403. record establishes though deterioration poor formula executed released 9, interviews Engineering Order. coverage leakage less obvious. 1986. 180. subsequently years. 180-182. During meetings Order, record, [publicly disclosed] [we]re is, finding disclosures, vacate remand determination 1989. NOTES fact. Qui short "qui pro domino rege quam se ipso hac parte sequitur," "who pursues Lord King's behalf own." [3] Order 5480.2 (Dec. 1982), 5483.1 5483.1A (June 22, 1983), 6430.1 12, 1983) (DOE Design Criteria Manual); Colo.Rev.Stat. 25-5-501 seq. (1982) (Hazardous Substances), 25-7-101 (1982 Supp. 1988) (Air Quality Control Program), 25-7-501 (Asbestos Control), XX-XX-XXX Waste Management Act), 25-8-201 (Water Supp.1988) (Radiation Substance Incidents), 25-5-503 (1982), 25-8-506, 25-8-608, XX-XX-XXX, XX-XX-XXX; Occupational Safety Health 1970, 651 seq.; Atomic 1954, amended, 2011 Reorganization 1974, 5801 Water Pollution Prevention 33 1251 Clean Air 7401 Safe Drinking 300f promulgated statutes. [4] charged concealing problems "saltcrete" salt liquid treatment processes) "spray irrigation" method generated sewage Flats). [5] Courts question. 353-355 2003) (describing Appeals' divergent approaches). Only demoting footnote paraphrasing assumes STEVENS assert (without analysis) "plain." post, 1413 (dissenting opinion). [6] defendant removes presence amendment generally Carnegie-Mellon Univ. Cohill, 484 343, 357, 108 614, 98 720 (1988); St. Mercury Indemnity Red Cab 283, 293, 58 586, 82 (1938). forum-manipulation concerns exist chooses forum pleads away amendment. [7] caveat: pre-existing defects complaint; cures resulting "No "For paragraph, `original source' reevaluate approach, argued, interfere ability tailor advanced sees appropriate. adopt, relates easily revisited

Classification Label: 7