Quesenberry v. RSE Corporation
- Thomas Hixson
- 3:23-cv-05020
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Quesenberry v. RSE, Judge Hixson ordered counsel or a new complaint after the government declined to join Quesenberry’s False Claims Act case.
Bryan Quesenberry, who must either obtain legal counsel to continue the False Claims Act claim or file an amended complaint that does not pursue that claim; RSE Corporation is the defendant, and the United States declined to intervene.
What happened
Quesenberry v. RSE Corporation involves Bryan Quesenberry’s complaint for the United States under the False Claims Act, a law allowing a private person to sue over alleged fraud against the government. The government declined to participate in the case.
The court explained that a person cannot prosecute this type of case without a lawyer because the claim belongs to the United States. The court did not decide whether the alleged fraud occurred.
Judge Thomas S. Hixson ordered Quesenberry to obtain counsel by June 26, 2025, or file an amended complaint that does not assert or refer to a False Claims Act case. If counsel does not appear, the court will recommend dismissal of the False Claims Act claim.
The detailed version
- Quesenberry v. RSE Corporation · No. 3:23-cv-05020
- Thomas Hixson
- June 2, 2025
Background
Bryan Quesenberry filed a complaint on behalf of the United States under the False Claims Act (FCA). The United States filed a notice declining to intervene, meaning it chose not to participate in prosecuting the case at that time.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that the FCA permits a private person, called a relator, to bring a fraud claim in the name of the United States. When the government declines to intervene, the relator generally has the right to conduct the case, but the relator is still representing the government and prosecuting the government’s claim.
Relying on Ninth Circuit precedent, the court held that an FCA relator may not prosecute the case without legal counsel. The court stated that the FCA does not authorize a relator to proceed without a lawyer because the relator is not pursuing only a personal claim; the underlying fraud claim belongs to the government.
Order
The court ordered that, if Quesenberry wishes to pursue the FCA claim, legal counsel must file a notice of appearance by June 26, 2025. If counsel does not appear by that date, the court shall recommend that the FCA claim be dismissed.
Alternatively, Quesenberry may file a first amended complaint by June 26, 2025. That complaint may not assert an FCA claim, refer to a relator, qui tam, or the False Claims Act, or suggest that Quesenberry is acting for the United States. The court also ordered that any continued FCA case through counsel, or any amended complaint, must comply with the service requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.
The order did not itself dismiss the FCA claim and did not decide the merits of the alleged fraud.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.