GUARDIOLA v. RENOWN HEALTH, 3:12-cv-00295

Guardiola, a qui tam relator under the False Claims Act (FCA), sued Renown for allegedly fraudulent billing of government health programs; the United States declined to intervene.
Parties settled; Guardiola is undisputedly entitled to a percentage of the settlement recovered in the lawsuit.
Guardiola alleges the government separately recovered additional, identical claims from Renown through a Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) process and seeks a 29% relator share of those RAC-recovered funds as an “alternate remedy.”
Guardiola moved for an order requiring the United States to pay her a share or provide an accounting; she also moved to seal exhibits attached to that motion.
The United States did not file a direct response but sought leave to file an amicus brief arguing sovereign immunity; the court treated the U.S. filing as an opposition brief request.
The parties also filed a stipulation dismissing Renown with prejudice pursuant to their settlement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court can order relief from the United States for RAC-recovered funds (alternate remedy)	Guardiola: FCA grants relator same rights in alternate proceedings; she is entitled to 29% of RAC recoveries or an accounting	U.S.: sovereign immunity bars relief; moreover, U.S. is not a party in this case and opposed via amicus filing	Court: Denied—cannot enter orders against the U.S. as a nonparty; motion for share denied for lack of jurisdiction
Whether the U.S. may file an amicus brief instead of responding	Guardiola: U.S. should respond, not appear as amicus	U.S.: sought leave to file amicus brief opposing motion	Court: Denied as moot because main motion denied; discussed that U.S. is a real party in interest but not a party to the suit
Whether exhibits should be sealed under protective order	Guardiola: Exhibits contain protected health and business information; seek sealing under the protective order	No opposition recorded	Court: Granted—exhibits fall within the Qualified Protective Order
Whether defendants should be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to settlement	Parties: Stipulation to dismiss Renown with prejudice	N/A	Court: Granted—Renown dismissed with prejudice

Eisenstein v. City of New York, 556 U.S. 928 (2009) (U.S. is a "real party in interest" in qui tam suits but is not automatically a party for all procedural purposes)
Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880 (2008) (general rule that courts may not bind nonparties to in personam judgments)
Kenseth v. Dean Health Plan, Inc., 722 F.3d 869 (7th Cir. 2013) (reiterating limits on entering orders against nonparties)