construe the channels of public disclosure specified in § 3730(e)(4)(A). See Schindler Elevator Corp. v. United States ex rel. Kirk, — U.S.-,-, 131 S.Ct. 1885, 1891, 179 L.Ed.2d 825 (2011) (noting that the “sources of public disclosure in § 3730(e)(4)(A), especially ‘news media,’ suggest that the public disclosure bar provides ‘a broa[d] sweep’ ”). Courts in our Circuit, for example, have construed the term “news media” to include readily accessible websites. See United States ex rel Green v. Serv. Contract Educ. & Training Trust Fund, 843 F.Supp.2d 20, 32 (D.D.C.2012). Courts have also broadly construed the term “administrative reports” to include publiely-searchable databases. See United States ex rel. Rosner v. WB/Stellar IP Owner, L.L.C., 739 F.Supp.2d 396, 407 (S.D.N.Y.2010) (<HOLDING>). Here, the defendants argue that the
recognizing that public utilities affect the public interest in that they render essential public services to a large number of the general public holding that a childabuse report is not a public record and therefore is not subject to public inspection holding that draft pleadings are not subject to public records disclosure holding that the disclosure is a public disclosure within the meaning of the fca if the the prior public disclosure  contained enough information to enable the government to pursue an investigation against the defendant holding that a public database on a city agencys website was an administrative report subject to public disclosure bar