
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                              _________________________          No. 95-1263                 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. RONALD A. LEBLANC,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                         v.                                RAYTHEON COMPANY, INC.,                                 Defendant, Appellee.                              _________________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                   [Hon. Reginald C. Lindsay, U.S. District Judge]                                              ___________________                              _________________________                                        Before                          Selya and Boudin, Circuit Judges,                                            ______________                              and Lisi*, District Judge.                                         ______________                              _________________________               Robert  D. City,  with  whom Philip  di  Domenico and  City,               _______________              ____________________      _____          Hayes, Meagher & Dissette, P.C. were on brief, for appellant.          _______________________________               Martin J.  Newhouse, with  whom Theodore  M. Hess-Mahan  and               ___________________             _______________________          Ropes & Gray were on brief, for appellee.          ____________                              _________________________                                    August 9, 1995                              _________________________          ____________________          *Of the District of Rhode Island, sitting by designation.                    SELYA, Circuit  Judge.   This appeal  stems from  a so-                    SELYA, Circuit  Judge.                           ______________          called  qui tam  action brought  under the  False Claims  Act, 31                  ___ ___          U.S.C.   3730 (1988).  The defendant moved, early on,  to dismiss          for want  of subject  matter jurisdiction.   See Fed. R.  Civ. P.                                                       ___          12(b)(1).  The court below granted the motion, writing a careful,          well-reasoned  opinion that  correctly  analyzed and  applied the          relevant doctrines.    See  United  States  ex  rel.  LeBlanc  v.                                 ___  _________________________________          Raytheon Co., 874 F. Supp. 35 (D. Mass. 1995).          ____________                    It is  our preferred  practice  that when,  as now,  "a          trial court has  produced a first-rate work  product, a reviewing          tribunal  should hesitate to wax longiloquent  simply to hear its          own words  resonate."   In re  San Juan Dupont  Plaza Hotel  Fire                                  _________________________________________          Litig., 989  F.2d 36,  38 (1st Cir.  1993).   That wise  adage is          ______          fully  applicable here.    Accordingly, we  affirm  the order  of          dismissal for substantially the reasons elucidated in the opinion          below.                    We need  go no further.   The judgment of  the district          court is summarily affirmed.  See 1st Cir. R. 27.1.                                        ___          Affirmed.          Affirmed.          ________                                          2
