Mazik et al v. Kaiser Permanente, Inc. et al

Filing 67

ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/06/21 re 66 Notice of Election filed by State of California, et al., UNSEALING the 48 Amended Complaint; defendants shall be served by the relator. All other contents of the Court's fi le in this action remain under seal and not be made public or served upon the defendant, except for filings already unsealed by order of the Court. The parties shall serve all pleadings and motions upon the Plaintiff States and the other states� 39; respective false claims acts (excluding Maryland). In accordance with the terms of the Maryland False Health Claims Act, the State of Maryland having declined to intervene in this matter, all claims asserted on behalf of Maryland are DISMISSED without prejudice. (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ROB BONTA Attorney General of California VINCENT DICARLO Supervising Deputy Attorney General KEVIN C. DAVIS State Bar No. 253425 Deputy Attorney General E-mail: Kevin.Davis@doj.ca.gov 2329 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 200 Sacramento, CA 95833-4252 Telephone: (916) 621-1869 Fax: (916) 274-2929 Attorneys for State of California 8 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 15 UNITED STATES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF COLORADO, STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF HAWAII, STATE OF MARYLAND, COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, STATE OF WASHINGTON ex rel. JEFFREY MAZIK, 16 Plaintiffs, 13 14 17 18 2:19-cv-0559 JAM KJN ORDER ON THE PLAINTIFF STATES’ NOTICE OF ELECTION TO DECLINE INTERVENTION AS TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT v. 20 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN, INC., KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS, INC., and THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUPS, 21 Defendants. 19 22 ORDER 23 24 Since Plaintiffs California, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Virginia, and Washington 25 (collectively, the “Plaintiff States”) have declined to intervene in this action pursuant to their 26 respective false claims acts (e.g. Cal. Gov’t Code § 12652(c)(6)(B)), the Court rules as follows 27 /// 28 /// 1 Order on Plaintiff States’ Notice of Election to Decline Intervention as to First Amended Complaint 1 IT IS ORDERED THAT: 2 1. The First Amended Complaint be unsealed and served upon the defendants by the relator; 3 2. All other contents of the Court’s file in this action shall remain under seal and not be made 4 public or served upon the defendants, except for filings already unsealed by order of the Court; 5 3. The parties shall serve all pleadings and motions filed in this action, including supporting 6 memoranda, upon the Plaintiff States as provided for in Cal. Gov’t Code § 12652(f)(1) and the 7 other states’ respective false claims acts (excluding Maryland). The Plaintiff States (other than 8 Maryland) may order any deposition transcripts and are entitled to intervene in this action as 9 provided in their respective false claims acts at any time; and 10 4. The parties shall serve all notices of appeal on the Plaintiff States; 11 5. All orders of this Court shall be served on the Plaintiff States; and that 12 6. Should the relator or the defendants propose that this action be dismissed, settled, or 13 otherwise discontinued, the Court will provide the Plaintiff States (other than Maryland) with notice 14 and an opportunity to be heard before ruling or granting its approval, in accordance with Cal. Gov’t 15 Code § 12652(c)(1) and the respective false claims acts of the Plaintiff States. 16 7. In accordance with the terms of the Maryland False Health Claims Act, Md. Code Ann., 17 Health Gen, § 2-604 (a)(7), the State of Maryland having declined to intervene in this matter, all 18 claims asserted on behalf of Maryland are hereby dismissed without prejudice. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 21 22 23 DATED: December 6, 2021 /s/ John A. Mendez THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28 2 Order on Plaintiff States’ Notice of Election to Decline Intervention as to First Amended Complaint

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?