Relator's Detailed Allegations Cannot Overcome Public Disclosure Bar

In U.S. ex rel. Mateski v. Raytheon Co. (C.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2013), the district court dismissed the qui tam relator's action under the pre-2010 "public disclosure" provision, holding that, although the relator's allegations were much more specific than the information which had been publicly disclosed in the media, congressional hearings, and administrative reports, the broadly worded public disclosures on the same topics were sufficient to supply the government with enough information to initiate an investigation and, therefore, barred the action. The court rejected the relator's novel suggestion that it apply a Rule 9(b) particularity requirement to the publicly disclosed information, and it rejected his contention that he was an original source because (a) he had no hand in the public disclosure (a requirement which not all circuits apply), (b) he failed to provide his information to the government before filing suit, and (c) he could not demonstrate that he saw the fraud with his own eyes.