Susanville Indian Rancheria v. Becerra

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: April 8, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-00094
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 AHdoabmbs ,P S. tBraauilse,y D (eCaAn &B aWr Nalok.e 2r,7 L82L0P8 ) 2 1903 21st St., 3rd Floor Sacramento, CA 95811 3 Phone: (916) 442-9444 Fax: (916) 442-8344 4 Email: abailey@hobbsstraus.com

5 Attorneys for Plaintiff

6 MICHELE BECKWITH Acting United States Attorney 7 JOSEPH B. FRUEH Assistant United States Attorney 8 501 I Street, Suite 10-100 Sacramento, CA 95814 9 E-mail: joseph.frueh@usdoj.gov Telephone: (916) 554-2702 10 Facsimile: (916) 554-2900

11 Attorneys for Defendants

13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15 SUSANVILLE INDIAN RANCHERIA, No. 2:25-cv-00094-CSK

16 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 17 v. FOR STAYING CASE

18 ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.,1 in his official capacity as Secretary, U.S. Department of 19 Health & Human Services, et al.,

20 Defendants.

21 22 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties and subject to Court approval, that 23 this action be stayed while the parties work toward informally resolving claims recently recognized by 24 the Supreme Court in Becerra v. San Carlos Apache Tribe, 602 U.S. 222 (2024); and that the parties file 25 a Joint Status Report on or before July 11, 2025. The reasons for this stipulation are as follows.

26 1 Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., was sworn in as the United States Secretary of Health and Human 27 Services on February 13, 2025. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, he should be substituted automatically for Dr. Dorothy Fink as the defendant in this action. 28 1 1. A court may stay proceedings as part of its inherent power “to control the disposition of 2 the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” 3 Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936); see also, e.g., Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 4 (1997) (“The District Court has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to 5 control its own docket.”). 6 2. This case involves claims for “contract support costs” associated with program income 7 that a Tribal organization expends on health programs that it has contracted to operate under the Indian 8 Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (“ISDEAA”), 25 U.S.C. §§ 5301–5423. Plaintiff filed 9 this action shortly after the Supreme Court recognized such claims as cognizable under the ISDEAA in 10 Becerra v. San Carlos Apache Tribe, 602 U.S. 222 (2024). 11 3. Following the Supreme Court’s decision, the Indian Health Service convened meetings of 12 a Contract Support Cost Advisory Group in July and August 2024. In those meetings, Tribal 13 representatives and representatives of the Indian Health Service discussed possible methodologies for 14 determining contract support costs following the Supreme Court’s decision. On September 10, 2024, 15 the Indian Health Service initiated a national consultation seeking feedback from Tribes on the Agency’s 16 proposals to calculate contract support costs related to expenditures of program income.2 17 4. The Indian Health Service’s national consultation with the Tribes concluded in mid- 18 October 2024. Thereafter, the Contract Support Cost Advisory Group reconvened and finalized 19 recommendations that the Director of the Indian Health Service adopted on December 10, 2024.3 20 5. The Indian Health Service will gather the financial documents in its possession pertaining 21 to the claim asserted in this case for contract support costs for calendar years 2017–2021. The Indian 22 Health Service also anticipates retaining an expert to analyze and value the claim. This expert is 23 familiar with the type of claim presented in this action and has assisted the Indian Health Service and 24 25 2 See Letter from Indian Health Service to Tribal Leaders (Sept. 10, 2024), https://www.ihs.gov/ 26 sites/newsroom/themes/responsive2017/display_objects/documents/2024_Letters/DTLL_091024.pdf. 27 3 See Letter from Indian Health Service to Tribal Leaders (Dec. 20, 2024), https://www.ihs.gov/ sites/newsroom/themes/responsive2017/display_objects/documents/2024_Letters/DTLL_12202024.pdf 28 ] || other Tribes and Tribal organizations in resolving such claims in light of Becerra v. San Carlos Apache 2 || Tribe, 602 U.S. 222 (2024). 3 6. After the Indian Health Service’s expert completes his preliminary analysis, the Indian 4 || Health Service may request additional information from Plaintiff Susanville Indian Rancheria. 5 7. The parties will work in good faith to value and attempt to resolve Plaintiffs claim for 6 || contract support costs for calendar years 2017-2021, and the parties respectfully request an initial 7 || 90 days to do so, at which time the parties will update the Court on their progress. 8 8. Other cases involving similar claims have been stayed for the same reasons, including, 9 || for example, Navajo Health Foundation-Sage Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Becerra, Case No. 3:23-cv- 10 || 08065-DLR (D. Ariz.), and Northern Valley Indian Health, Inc. v. Becerra, Case No. 2:24-cv-02154- 11 || DIC-DMC (E.D. Cal.). 12 9. The parties propose filing a Joint Status Report on or before July 11, 2025. 13 Respectfully submitted, 14 || Dated: April 3, 2025 HOBBS, STRAUS, DEAN & WALKER, LLP 15 By: /s/ Adam P. Bailey (authorized 4/3/2025) 6 ADAM P. BAILEY

Attomeys for Plaintiff

18 |} Dated: April 4, 2025 MICHELE BECK WITH 19 Acting United States Attorney By: /s/ Joseph B. Frueh 20 JOSEPH B. FRUEH > Assistant United States Attorney 9 Attorneys for Defendants

23 || IT IS SO ORDERED - \ . 24 || Dated: April 7, 2025 hn we L— HON. CHI SOO KIM 25 United States Magistrate Judge 26 27 || 4, susa0094.25 28 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR STAYING CASE