Jane Doe et al v. Xavier Becerra et al
Filing
219
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT, PERMANENT INJUNCTION, AND STAY PENDING APPEAL by Judge David O. Carter. SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. (twdb)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
SOUTHERN DIVISION
14
15
16
17
18
19
JANE DOE, et al.,
No. 8:19-cv-02105 DOC (ADSx)
Plaintiffs.
v.
ROB BONTA, in his official capacity as
Attorney General; et al.,
STIPULATED FINAL
JUDGMENT, PERMANENT
INJUNCTION, AND STAY
PENDING APPEAL
Defendants.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
No. 8:19-cv-02105 DOC (ADSx)
STIPULATED FINAL
JUDGMENT AND
PERMANENT INJUNCTION
1
Several Plaintiffs1 in these related cases filed complaints in 2019 alleging
2
that Assembly Bill No. 290, ch. 862, 2019 Cal. Stat. ___ (“AB 290”), violates their
3
rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States
4
Constitution and was preempted by federal law, and therefore could not be
5
lawfully administered or enforced by Defendants.2 ECF No. 1; Fresenius docket,
6
Case No. 8:19-cv-2130, ECF No. 1.
7
On December 30, 2019, the Court granted a preliminary injunction,
8
enjoining the administration or enforcement of AB 290 in full. See ECF No. 58.
9
On January 9, 2024, the Court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiffs’ motions
10
for summary judgment, holding that certain provisions of AB 290 violate the First
11
Amendment of the United States Constitution, and are therefore void. See ECF
12
No. 189. The Court also granted in part and denied in part Defendants’ motions
13
for summary judgment, holding that other provisions of AB 290 are constitutional.
14
See id. On April 4, 2024, the Court denied Defendants’ motion for
15
reconsideration. See ECF No. 214.
16
Without waiving their rights to appeal, Plaintiffs and Defendants, by and
17
through their counsel, have agreed to the entry of this Stipulated Final Judgment,
18
Permanent Injunction, and Stay Pending Appeal to (i) effectuate the Court’s
19
summary judgment decision, and (ii) to preserve the status quo during the
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The Plaintiffs are Jane Doe; Stephen Albright; the American Kidney Fund,
Inc., Dialysis Patient Citizens, Inc., Fresenius Medical Care Orange County, LLC;
DaVita Inc.; Fresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc., doing business as Fresenius
Medical Care North America; and U.S. Renal Care, Inc.
1
Defendants are Rob Bonta, in his Official Capacity as Attorney General of
California; Ricardo Lara, in his Official Capacity as the Director of the California
Department of Insurance; Mary Watanabe, in her Official Capacity as Director of
the California Department of Managed Health Care; and Tomás J. Aragón, in his
official capacity as Acting Director of the California Department of Public Health.
2
No. 8:19-cv-02105 DOC (ADSx)
-1-
STIPULATED FINAL
JUDGMENT AND
PERMANENT INJUNCTION
1
pendency of any appeal.3 The Court having considered the filings, and with good
2
cause therefor appearing, HEREBY ORDERS, ADJUDGES, AND DECREES
3
as follows:
4
DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
5
6
1.
over the parties pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1331 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
7
8
This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case and
2.
The Court may declare the legal rights and obligations of the parties in
this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201.
9
3.
Venue in this District is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
10
4.
Sections 2(a), 3(b)(4), and 5(b)(4) of AB 290 violate the First
11
Amendment of the United States Constitution and are void and shall not be
12
administered or enforced by any Defendant or by any Defendant’s agents, servants,
13
or employees.
14
5.
Sections 3(b)(2) and 5(b)(2) of AB 290 violate the First Amendment
15
of the United States Constitution and are void and shall not be administered or
16
enforced by any Defendant or by any Defendant’s agents, servants, or employees.
17
6.
Sections 3(c)(2) and 5(c)(2) of AB 290 violate the First Amendment
18
of the United States Constitution and are void and shall not be administered or
19
enforced by any Defendant or by any Defendant’s agents, servants, or employees.
7.
20
21
sections 3(c)(2) and 5(c)(2) are severable from the remainder of AB 290.
8.
22
23
Sections 2(a), 3(b)(4), and 5(b)(4), sections 3(b)(2) and 5(b)(2), and
Sections 3(e)(1), 3(f)(1), 5(e)(1), and 5(f)(1) of AB 290 do not violate
the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiffs and Defendants have submitted the Stipulated Final Judgment solely
for the purpose of facilitating the entry of Final Judgment, and they do so expressly
preserving all available rights to challenge on appeal any aspect of the Court’s
summary judgment decision underlying the Final Judgment.
3
No. 8:19-cv-02105 DOC (ADSx)
-2-
STIPULATED FINAL
JUDGMENT AND
PERMANENT INJUNCTION
1
2
3
4
5
9.
Sections 3(b)(3) and 5(b)(3) of AB 290 do not violate the First
Amendment of the United States Constitution.
10.
Section 7 of AB 290 does not violate the First Amendment of the
United States Constitution.
11.
With regard to Plaintiffs’ claims that AB 290 is preempted by the
6
United States Constitution, as well as Plaintiffs claims arising under the Contracts,
7
Due Process, and Takings Clauses of the United States Constitution, judgment is
8
entered in favor of Defendants.
9
10
STAY PENDING APPEAL
12.
Consistent with the agreement of the parties and in order to preserve
11
the status quo that has existed since this Court preliminarily enjoined
12
administration or enforcement of AB 290 in 2019, the existing preliminary
13
injunction shall remain in effect—and thereby continue to stay and enjoin
14
implementation or enforcement of AB 290—until 30 days after the United States
15
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issues an opinion deciding any appeals by
16
the parties. At that time, the existing preliminary injunction shall terminate—and
17
the implementation of AB 290 shall no longer be stayed—unless extended by court
18
order. That termination shall not be contingent on the court of appeals’ issuance of
19
the mandate, or on the resolution of any petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc
20
filed in the court of appeals, or of any petition for writ of certiorari filed in the U.S.
21
Supreme Court. Defendants shall not seek to administer or enforce AB 290
22
pending the resolution of any appeals of this Judgment while the existing
23
preliminary injunction remains in effect as described above, or if no party seeks to
24
appeal this Judgment, until the parties’ time for filing an appeal of this Judgment
25
has elapsed. The stay does not prohibit Defendants from preparing to implement
26
and enforce AB 290, including by taking steps to establish an independent dispute
27
resolution process, as set forth in sections 3(f)(1) and 5(f)(1) of AB 290. The
28
No. 8:19-cv-02105 DOC (ADSx)
-3-
STIPULATED FINAL
JUDGMENT AND
PERMANENT INJUNCTION
1
Court finds that the standards for the stay of this Judgment pending appeal are
2
satisfied.
3
13.
4
Pending the final resolution of any appeals, the Court may consider
any appropriate modifications to this Final Judgment or other relief.
5
6
ATTORNEYS’ FEES
14.
It does not appear to the Court that consideration of any appeal would
7
be better informed if accompanied by a decision on attorneys’ fees and costs.
8
Further, the result of any appeals may affect whether and in what amount
9
attorneys’ fees are warranted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 58, Advisory Committee Notes
10
(1993 Amendment) (“Particularly if the claim for fees involves substantial issues
11
or is likely to be affected by the appellate decision, the district court may prefer to
12
defer consideration of the claim for fees until after the appeal is resolved.”).
13
15.
Accordingly, the filing and briefing of any motions for attorneys’ fees,
14
including expenses and costs, is hereby temporarily postponed until after the
15
resolution of any and all appeals of this Judgment filed by any of the parties, or if
16
no party seeks to appeal this Judgment, until after the parties’ time for filing an
17
appeal of this Judgment has elapsed. The deadline for filing any motion for
18
attorneys’ fees and bill of costs is extended until the end of the 60th day following
19
the final resolution of all appeals. This order is without prejudice to any party
20
seeking to modify the schedule if appellate proceedings are delayed or good cause
21
otherwise exists for addressing the issue of attorneys’ fees, including expenses and
22
costs, before the appeals are fully and finally resolved.
23
24
25
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 0D\, 2024
26
________________________
DAVID O. CARTER
United States District Judge
27
28
No. 8:19-cv-02105 DOC (ADSx)
-4-
STIPULATED FINAL
JUDGMENT AND
PERMANENT INJUNCTION
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?