Beitzel v. Becerra

Opinion

Melissa C. Brown (SBN 110292) COMMUNITY LEGAL SERVICES McGEORGE SCHOOL OF LAW 3200 Fifth Ave. Sacramento, CA 95817 (916) 739-7378 mbrown1@pacific.edu

Alice Bers (pro hac vice) Justin Lalor (pro hac vice) P.O. Box 350 Willimantic, CT 06226 (860) 456-7790 abers@medicareadvocacy.org jlalor@medicareadvocacy.org Attorneys for Plaintiffs PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney JOSEPH B. FRUEH Assistant United States Attorney 501 I Street, Suite 10-100 Sacramento, CA 95814 Email: joseph.frueh@usdoj.gov Telephone: (916) 554-2702 Facsimile: (916) 554-2900 Attorneys for Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GEORGE BEITZEL, et al., on behalf of No. 2:23-cv-01932-WBS-DB themselves and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs, STIPULATION, UNOPPOSED MOTION, AND ORDER FOR ENTRY OF v. JUDGMENT XAVIER BECERRA, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant. Pending the Court’s approval, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective counsel of record, that it is appropriate for the Court to enter judgment in this action in favor of the Defendant, Secretary of Health and Human Services. On April 22, 2024, the Court entered its Order and Memorandum Granting the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint, with leave for Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint consistent with the Order within 20 days (Docket No. 35 at 11). The 20-day period has since elapsed and Plaintiffs have not filed and do not elect to file an amended complaint. Based on these circumstances, Plaintiffs respectfully submit that judgment in favor of the Defendant, Secretary of Health and Human Services, is appropriate. See WMX Techs., Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir. 1997) (en banc) (requiring further district court determination before plaintiff who had been given leave to amend complaint could appeal); see also Unified Data Servs., LLC v. FTC, 39 F.4th 1200, 1206-07 (9th Cir. 2022) (WMX Technologies reaffirmed that plaintiff given leave to amend should alert district court of intent to rest on complaint; appealable final order may then be entered); Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(b)(1)(C) (entry of judgment when all relief has been denied). Undersigned counsel for Plaintiffs contacted Defendant’s counsel who does not oppose this request for entry of judgment. DATED: May 22, 2024 Respectfully submitted, By: /s/Alice Bers Alice Bers (pro hac vice) Justin Lalor (pro hac vice) CENTER FOR MEDICARE ADVOCACY Melissa C. Brown (SBN 110292) McGEORGE SCHOOL OF LAW Attorneys for Plaintiffs

United States Attorney By: /s/ Joseph B. Frueh (authorized 5/22/2024) Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant Secretary of Health and Human Services This Court considered Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended g | Complaint and filed its ruling on April 22, 2024, granting Defendant’s motion (Docket No. 35). 9g | The Order granted Plaintiffs 20 days’ leave to amend. The time for Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint has since expired and Plaintiffs filed the present application stating they do not elect to file an amended complaint. For these reasons and pursuant to the parties’ foregoing stipulation and unopposed motion, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the decision granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss is final and appealable and judgment shall be entered in favor of Defendant. ITISSO ORDERED. Dated: May 23, 2024 A the th, b~-— WILLIAMB.SHUBB UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3 Stip. & P.O. for Entry of Judgment