1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 San Francisco Division 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel. Case No. 16-cv-00889-LB MICHAEL MCNALL and KARYL 12 MCNALL, ORDER DISMISSING CASE 13 Plaintiffs, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE GOVERNMENT 14 v.

15 PACIFIC RETIREMENT SERVICES, INC., et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 The court assumes the reader’s familiarity with the subject matter and procedural history of 19 this case. On August 29, 2019, the court granted Cotchett, Pitre, and McCarthy, LLP’s motion to 20 withdraw as counsel for the relators, Michael and Karyl McNall.1 The court stayed the case until 21 September 30, 2019 to give the McNalls an additional opportunity to retain new counsel.2 The 22 court cautioned the McNalls that if they failed to retain new counsel on or before the expiration of 23 24 25

26 1 Order – ECF No. 71. Citations refer to material in the Electronic Case File (“ECF”); pinpoint 27 citations are to the ECF-generated page numbers at the top of documents. 2 Id. at 6. 1 the stay, the court would dismiss this case without prejudice to the government.? The McNalls 2 have not retained new counsel (and have not filed a motion for an extension of time).* 3 A pro se plaintiff cannot bring a qui tam action or pursue a False Claims Act claim on behalf 4 of the United States. Stoner v. Santa Clara Cty. Office of Educ.,

, 1126—28 (9th Cir. 5 2007). As the McNalls have not retained new counsel, they cannot proceed with this case. The 6 court therefore dismisses the case without prejudice to the government. 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: October 4, 2019 LAE 10 LAUREL BEELER 11 United States Magistrate Judge a 12

14

15

16 & 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

28 || 4 See Docket.