In the case of United States ex rel. Irwin Eisenstein v. City of New York, New York, et al., 2008, the Supreme Court had to decide whether a party who intervenes in a lawsuit under the False Claims Act (FCA) is required to file an appeal within 30 days or if they have 60 days as would be granted for federal government parties. The plaintiff-appellant was Irwin Eisenstein and he filed a qui tam action against NYC alleging that it falsely reported its compliance with certain federal regulations tied to funding received from Federal Communications Commission's E-Rate program. When his claim was dismissed by lower courts, he appealed after more than 30 but less than 60 days which led to this issue before SCOTUS. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that even though U.S Government has not intervened in such cases initially, it still remains real party in interest throughout litigation process due its potential financial stake and therefore standard rule applies i.e., non-governmental parties must file notice of appeal within thirty-day limit set forth by Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

In the dissenting opinion for United States ex rel. Irwin Eisenstein v. City of New York, New York, et al., Justice Scalia argued that the majority's decision to allow a 30-day period for filing an appeal after a party has been notified of judgment was incorrect and not in line with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(A). He contended that this rule should only apply when there is no timely notice from any party involved in the case. In this particular case, since both parties had received timely notification about the judgment but failed to file an appeal within 60 days as required by law (Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(B)), he believed they forfeited their right to do so later on. Therefore, according to him, allowing them more time was against procedural rules and could set a dangerous precedent.