Healthcare Ally Management of California, LLC v. The J. Paul Getty Trust

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedOctober 21, 2022
Docket2:22-cv-05665
StatusUnknown

This text of Healthcare Ally Management of California, LLC v. The J. Paul Getty Trust (Healthcare Ally Management of California, LLC v. The J. Paul Getty Trust) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Healthcare Ally Management of California, LLC v. The J. Paul Getty Trust, (C.D. Cal. 2022).

Opinion

Case 2:22-cv-05665-DMG-KS Document 12 Filed 10/21/22 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:104

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. CV 22-5665-DMG (KSx) Date October 21, 2022

Title Healthcare Ally Mgmt. of Cal., LLC v. The J. Paul Getty Trust Page 1 of 1

Present: The Honorable DOLLY M. GEE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

KANE TIEN NOT REPORTED Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s) Attorneys Present for Defendant(s) None Present None Present

Proceedings: [IN CHAMBERS] ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE REMANDED TO STATE COURT FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

On August 11, 2022, Defendant, The J. Paul Getty Trust, filed a notice of removal of the Complaint, which asserts state law claims and was filed in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. [Doc. # 1.] Defendant claims that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the Complaint because Section 502(a) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B), completely preempts Plaintiff’s claims, where those claims seek recovery of benefits under an ERISA-governed health plan. [Doc. # 1 at 2.]

The Court is not persuaded that complete preemption applies here. Therefore, the Court directs Defendant to show cause why this case should not be remanded to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). By November 4, 2022, Defendant shall file a brief not to exceed 10 pages explaining why this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the Complaint. Defendant shall address Marin General Hospital v. Modesto & Empire Traction Co., 581 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 2009), and any other applicable authority. Plaintiff shall file any responsive brief, which shall not exceed 10 pages, by November 18, 2022. Defendant may file a reply brief not to exceed 5 pages on or before November 25, 2022.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk KT

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Healthcare Ally Management of California, LLC v. The J. Paul Getty Trust, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/healthcare-ally-management-of-california-llc-v-the-j-paul-getty-trust-cacd-2022.