Stacy Fennell v. Anthem, Inc.

• Court: District Court, C.D. California
• Decided: January 4, 2023
• Docket: 2:22-cv-07379
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

Case 2:22-cv-07379-PA-E Document 26 Filed 01/04/23 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:1275

1 Johnny Rundell (SBN 289480) Elias K. Fakhoury (SBN 334666) 2 HERSHEY LAW, P.C. HELMER FRIEDMAN LLP 3 16255 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1205 Encino, CA 91436 4 Telephone: (310) 929-2190 Facsimile: (310) 929-6060 5 Thy B. Bui (SBN 256383) 6 Lisa Yumi Mitchell (SBN 311407) Ayan K. Jacobs (SBN 329934) 7 CONSTANGY, BROOKS, SMITH & PROPHETE, LLP 8 2029 Century Park East, Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 9 Telephone: (310) 909-7775 Facsimile: (424) 465-6630 10 Attorneys for Defendant 11 ELEVANCE HEALTH, INC. 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – WESTERN DIVISION 14 15 STACY FENNELL, an individual, Ca es No. 2:22-cv-07379-PA-E 16 Plaintiff, 17 ORDER RE: JOINT vs. STIPULATION FOR BINDING 18 ARBITRATION ANTHEM, INC., and DOES 1 19 through 50 inclusive, Action Filed: May 19, 2022 20 Defendants. Removal Date: October 11, 2022 21 Trial Date: October 24, 2023 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR BINDING ARBITRATION Case 2:22-cv-07379-PA-E Document 26 Filed 01/04/23 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:1276

ORDER 1 Pursuant the Stipulation of Plaintiff Stacy Fennell (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant 2 Elevance Health Inc. f/k/a Anthem, Inc. (“Elevance Health” or “Defendant”), and for 3 good cause showing, IT IS SO ORDERED: 4 1. Plaintiff shall arbitrate the claims asserted in this Action in accordance 5 with the Arbitration Policy that is attached as Exhibit A to the Parties’ Joint Stipulation 6 and the terms of the Stipulation itself. 7 2. Because the Parties have agreed to submit this entire action to binding 8 arbitration, the Court concludes that a valid agreement to arbitrate exists and that it 9 encompasses each of the claims at issue in this action. Having referred Plaintiff’s claims 10 to arbitration, the Court DISMISSES the action without prejudice. See Thinket Ink Info. 11 Res., Inc. v. Sun Microsystems, Inc., 368 F.3d 1053, 1060 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that 12 district court did not err in dismissing claims subject to arbitration and noting that FAA 13 allows but does not require a stay of court proceedings). 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 Dated: January 4, 2023 _________________________________ 17 Percy Anderson United States District Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR BINDING ARBITRATION