Page:Code Revision Commission v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc. (F.3d).djvu/1

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

CODE REVISION COM’N v. PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC.
Cite as 906 F.3d 1229 (11th Cir. 2018)

1229

award, including restitution previously paid.

We understand this to mean a relator is entitled to a share of the forfeited property to the extent the qui tam defendant can deduct any forfeiture from the qui tam award. It appears the government gave the Ninth Circuit the same assurance in Van Dyck. See 866 F.3d at 1135 n.3. We expect the government will honor it.

V. CONCLUSION

The District Court properly denied Ms. Carver’s motion to intervene. Under this Circuit’s “anomalous rule,” our jurisdiction “evaporates” with this conclusion “because the proper denial of leave to intervene is not a final decision.” E. Airlines, Inc., 736 F.2d at 637. We therefore DISMISS this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

CODE REVISION COMMISSION, FOR the Benefit of and on behalf of GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA, State of Georgia, Plaintiffs - Counter Defendant - Appellees,

v.

PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC., Defendant - Counter Claimant - Appellant.

No. 17-11589

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(October 19, 2018)