an action under this section based upon the public disclosure of allegations ... unless ... the person bringing the action is an original source of the information.” Id. § 3730(e)(4). 9 . Nothing in Lujan indicates that the Ninth Circuit meant the phrase "same material elements of fraud” to be construed differently than LaCorte’s phrase "all the essential facts” of the fraud, especially since the Ninth Circuit found LaCorte s "reasoning persuasive” as to the proper test under § 3730(b)(5). Lujan, 243 F.3d at 1189. 10 . Branch further contends that the district court erred in failing to analyze Rigsby for Rule 9(b) sufficiency because, according to Branch, a complaint that fails Rule 9(b) cannot constitute a first-filed action under § 3730(b)(5). See, e.g., Walburn, 431 F.3d at 972-73 (<HOLDING>). The sufficiency of the Rigsby complaint under
holding that the firsttofile rule did not bar complaint involving same defendants where firstfiled complaint did not put government on notice of a separate fraudulent scheme holding that documents affixed to complaint that contained alleged misrepresentations satisfied rule 9b holding that a complaint that fails rule 9b is rendered legally infirm from its inception and thus cannot preempt a laterfiled complaint under the firsttofile bar holding a complaint failed to satisfy rule 9b where the allegations were lacking in detail holding that group pleading did not render complaint infirm where complaint provided fair notice of claims