MEMORANDUM

WILLIAM M. NICKERSON, District Judge.

The Complaint in this action was filed on May 14, 2015, along with a motion to seal. Because of the pending motion to seal, the case remained under temporary seal and Defendants have yet to be served. After nothing further was filed in this case for over a year and a half, the Court sent a letter to Plaintiff's counsel ordering him to show cause why this action should not be dismissed under Local Rule 103.8.b. Plaintiff's counsel responded, indicating that Plaintiff is now prepared to move forward with the Complaint and requests 15 days in which to file an Amended Complaint and to then serve it on Defendants. ECF No. 5. The Court will deny that request and dismiss this action for want of prosecution.

As acknowledged in Plaintiff's counsel's response to the show cause order, this action has its roots in an action filed in June of 2012, Rangarajan v. Johns Hopkins Health System Corp., WMN-12-1953 (Rangarajan I). In Rangarajan I, Plaintiff brought claims as a putative relator under the federal False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729(a)(1)(A)-(B), as well as under the Maryland False Health Claims Act, Md. Code Ann., Health-General §§ 2-602(a)(1)-(2). Id. (Counts I and II). She also asserted retaliation claims under those statutes, as well as some state tort claims. After the United States filed notice of its decision not to intervene in the false claims aspects of that action, Plaintiff filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss Counts I and II. The Court granted that motion on January 30, 2014.

Shortly before dismissing those claims, Plaintiff filed a second action in this Court on December 2, 2013, asserting claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., Rangarajan v. Johns Hopkins University, WMN-13-3630 (Rangarajan II). Rangarajan II was eventually consolidated with Rangarajan I on September 16, 2016. There has been extensive discovery in the now consolidated cases, dispositive motions have been filed, and those motions will soon be ripe.

Before that consolidation, on February 17, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion to amend in Rangarajan I, attempting to reassert the false claims act claims that she previously voluntarily dismissed. On April 14, 2015, this Court denied that motion on grounds of both undue delay and undue prejudice. The Court noted that Plaintiff's false claims act claims related to transactions that had transpired more than seven years prior to this attempt to revive them and that much of delay could be attributed to Plaintiff's own choices. One month later, Plaintiff filed this action, bringing essentially the same two false claims counts previously dismissed in Rangarajan I. This action was filed as a qui tam action on behalf of the United States, although Plaintiff's counsel now acknowledges that it should not have been filed in that manner, given that the government had already given notice that it would not intervene.

Plaintiff's counsel's failure to properly file this case so that Defendants would have notice of the filing, and then letting it languish for over a year and a half, has resulted in claims that, if permitted to go forward, would relate to transactions that took place as long as nine years ago. Plaintiff's counsel provides no explanation for his delay and the Court concludes that he has not shown good cause as to why this case should not be dismissed for want of prosecution.

A separate order unsealing and dismissing this action will issue.