No. 18-1312
Steven Mateski v. Raytheon Company
Response Waived
Tags: civil-procedure false-certification false-claims false-claims-act fraud fraud-allegations government-contract government-contracts materiality rule-9(b) rule-9b subcontract-compliance
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2019-05-09
Question Presented (from Petition)
Two questions are presented:
1. Did the Complaint give Raytheon sufficient notice of the particular misconduct alleged to constitute fraud, so that it was error to dismiss this case pursuant to Rule 9(b)?
2. Were the false claims alleged by Petitioner material to the Government's decision to pay Raytheon?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the complaint provided sufficient notice of the alleged false claims against Raytheon under Rule 9(b), and whether the alleged false claims were material to the government's decision to pay Raytheon
Docket Entries
2019-05-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-04-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/9/2019.
2019-04-17
Waiver of right of respondent Raytheon Company to respond filed.
2019-04-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 16, 2019)
Attorneys
Raytheon Company
Steven Mateski
Allan J. Graf — Suite 2300, Petitioner