context: No. 70.) Surely a qui tarn claim is no longer "valid" once it has been dismissed.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 232 F.Supp.3d 587, 587-89
citation_a.parenthetical: finding that relator's voluntary dismissal of his qui tarn suit precluded him from recovering, under "alternate remedy" theory, a portion of the proceeds the government ultimately obtained
citation_a.sentence: See L-3 Commc’ns, 232 F.Supp.3d at 587-89, 2017 WL 464431, at *4-5 (finding that relator’s voluntary dismissal of his qui tarn suit precluded him from recovering, under “alternate remedy” theory, a portion of the proceeds the government ultimately obtained); see also N. Adult Daily Health Care Ctr., 174 F.Supp.3d at 700 (finding relators’ motion for a share of proceeds recovered “premature” because a motion to dismiss the qui tarn action was pending and, thus, relators “may ultimately lack a valid qui tarn claim”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 174 F.Supp.3d 700, 700
citation_b.parenthetical: finding relators' motion for a share of proceeds recovered "premature" because a motion to dismiss the qui tarn action was pending and, thus, relators "may ultimately lack a valid qui tarn claim"
citation_b.sentence: See L-3 Commc’ns, 232 F.Supp.3d at 587-89, 2017 WL 464431, at *4-5 (finding that relator’s voluntary dismissal of his qui tarn suit precluded him from recovering, under “alternate remedy” theory, a portion of the proceeds the government ultimately obtained); see also N. Adult Daily Health Care Ctr., 174 F.Supp.3d at 700 (finding relators’ motion for a share of proceeds recovered “premature” because a motion to dismiss the qui tarn action was pending and, thus, relators “may ultimately lack a valid qui tarn claim”).