In United States ex rel. Feliciano v. Ardoin, a professional se relator filed a qui tam motion beneath the False Claims Act (“FCA”). On February 4, 2025, the D.C. Court docket of Appeals (the “Court docket”) affirmed a district courtroom’s dismissal ruling {that a} professional se litigant can’t allege violations of the FCA. In doing so, the Court docket joined each different courtroom of appeals to have addressed the query.
Background
The FCA, codified at 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733, empowers personal people, generally known as relators, to carry qui tam lawsuits on behalf of the U.S. authorities for false or fraudulent claims submitted for federal reimbursement. Pursuant to twenty-eight U.S.C. § 1654, events might conduct “their very own circumstances” professional se, however non-attorneys can’t seem professional se and search to symbolize others. As a result of FCA relators pursue the federal government’s claims, a number of circuits have decided this precludes relators from continuing professional se.
In 2023, Dañilo Augusto Feliciano (the “Relator”) filed a qui tam motion alleging the federal government was defrauded by the State of Louisiana after it submitted false statements to obtain federal funds to be used within the administration of its elections. The federal government declined to intervene and, in a submitting with the U.S. District Court docket for the District of Columbia, additional reasoned that the Relator couldn’t pursue the motion with out licensed counsel. In July of 2024, the district courtroom dismissed the case, prompting the Relator to file a discover of enchantment.
The Professional Se Rule
The Court docket affirmed the district courtroom’s dismissal ruling {that a} professional se litigant can’t allege violations of the FCA. In doing so, the Court docket joined each different courtroom of appeals to have addressed the query.
The Court docket’s reasoning was simple: FCA claims belong to the federal government, not the relator. The FCA comprises no exceptions to this background rule. Relators should have certified counsel to make sure that “the actual get together at curiosity, america, is sufficiently represented.” U.S. ex rel. Rockefeller v. Westinghouse Elec. Co., 274 F. Supp. second 10, 16 (D.D.C. 2003). That’s, so as to stop a professional se litigant from binding the federal government to an hostile judgment, relators should have competent counsel to assist in litigating the matter. Furthermore, the background rule is designed to permit the “better-equipped” get together to pursue the declare – and since just one particular person can carry a qui tam motion beneath the FCA on a selected set of underlying details, stopping professional se relators ensures the correct adjudication of meritorious claims.
Of their holding, the Court docket joined each different courtroom of appeals to have addressed whether or not a professional se relator can carry claims beneath the FCA:
- Wojcicki v. SCANA/SCE&G, 947 F.3d 240, 244 (4th Cir. 2020);
- S. ex rel. Brooks v. Ormsby, 869 F.3d 356, 357 (fifth Cir. 2017);
- S. ex rel. Mergent Servs. v. Flaherty, 540 F.3d 89, 92-94 (second Cir. 2008);
- Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 873-74 (eleventh Cir. 2008);
- Stoner v. Santa Clara Cnty. Off. of Educ., 502 F.3d 1116, 1125-28 (ninth Cir. 2007);
- S. ex rel. Lu v. Ou, 368 F.3d 773, 775-76 (seventh Cir. 2004); and
- United States v. Onan, 190 F.second 1, 6 (eighth Cir. 1951).
Sensible Takeaways
- The FCA Prohibits Professional Se Litigants from Pursuing Claims: FCA relators now should have enough authorized counsel to pursue the federal government’s claims within the D.C. Circuit.
When you’ve got questions or would love extra details about this matter, please contact:
Corridor Render weblog posts and articles are meant for informational functions solely. For moral causes, Corridor Render attorneys can’t—exterior of an attorney-client relationship—reply particular questions that will be authorized recommendation.
