The following excerpt is from United States ex rel. Mateski v. Raytheon Co., 816 F.3d 565 (9th Cir. 2016):
We review de novo a district court's dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and its interpretation of the False Claims Act. United States ex rel. Hartpence v. Kinetic Concepts, 792 F.3d 1121, 1126 (9th Cir.2015) (en banc). We review for clear error a district court's findings of fact that underlie its decisions on subject matter jurisdiction.
[816 F.3d 569]
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.