CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel. MARJORIE PRATHER,
Relator-Appellant,
v.
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITIES, INC. et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
   No. 17-5826
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville.
No. 3:12-cv-00764—Aleta Arthur Trauger, District Judge.
Argued: April 25, 2018
Decided and Filed: June 11, 2018
Before: MOORE, McKEAGUE, and DONALD, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. Brookdale Senior Living Communities employed Marjorie Prather to review Medicare claims prior to their submission for payment. Many of these claims were missing the required certifications from physicians attesting to the need for the medical services that the defendants had provided. These certifications need to “be obtained at the time the plan of care is established or as soon thereafter as possible.” 42 C.F.R. § 424.22(a)(2). But the defendants were allegedly obtaining certifications months after patients’ plans of care were established.

In July 2012, Prather filed a complaint pleading violations of the False Claims Act under an implied false certification theory. The district court dismissed her complaint, holding that Prather did not allege fraud with particularity or that the claims were false. This panel reversed the district court in part, holding that Prather had pleaded two of her claims with the required particularity and that the claims submitted were false. United States ex rel. Prather v. Brookdale Senior Living Cmties., Inc. (Prather I), 838 F.3d 750, 775 (6th Cir. 2016). In doing so, we interpreted the phrase “as soon thereafter as possible” in 42 C.F.R. § 424.22(a)(2) to mean that a delay in certification is “acceptable only if the length of the delay is justified by the reasons the home-health agency provides for it” and held that the reason alleged for the defendants’ delay was not justifiable. Id. at 765.

On remand, the district court granted Prather leave to file her Third Amended Complaint (“complaint”) in light of the Supreme Court’s clarification of the materiality element of a False Claims Act claim in Universal Health Services., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Escobar, ___ U.S. ___, 136 S. Ct. 1989 (2016). The defendants moved to dismiss again on the grounds that Prather did not plead sufficiently the materiality and scienter elements of her two alleged False Claims Act violations. The district court granted that motion, and Prather now appeals. For the reasons set forth below, we REVERSE the district court’s dismissal of Prather’s complaint and REMAND for proceedings consistent with this opinion.



CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
AMIR FRANCIS SHABO,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, Attorney General,
Respondent.
   No. 17-3881
On Petition for Review from the Board of Immigration Appeals;
No. A 026 808 024
Decided and Filed: June 11, 2018
Before: MOORE, THAPAR, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

JOHN K. BUSH, Circuit Judge. Amir Francis Shabo seeks to reopen his 1998 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) proceeding that ordered his removal to Iraq. He wants that removal withheld and seeks relief under the Convention Against Torture. He alleges that, as a Chaldean Christian, he faces likely torture in Iraq.

Because of Shabo’s prior criminal conviction and the operation of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) and (D), we lack jurisdiction to review the factual questions in his petition. Even if we were to agree with Shabo’s position on the reviewable question of law he presents—whether the changed-country-condition exception applies—we would lack jurisdiction to review the factual issue of whether Shabo established a prima facie case for relief. Therefore, under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) and the Article III doctrine of mootness, we dismiss his petition as unreviewable.