Arnold v. Blue Shield of California

Filing 27

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING REFERRAL OR SANCTION OF ADAM PINES Show Cause Response due by 12/6/2012.. Signed by Judge Alsup on November 26, 2012. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/26/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
KENNETH ARNOLD,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Plaintiff,

12
13
14
15
16

No. C 12-02115 WHA

v.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
REGARDING REFERRAL OR
SANCTION OF ADAM PINES

BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA,
Defendant.
/

In a November 15 submission, defendant’s counsel Adam Pines represented to the Court

17

that “the practice [in ERISA disputes] of soliciting input from third-party reviewers that are

18

identified by training and qualifications, but not by name, is . . . regularly approved by the

19

courts” (Dkt. No. 23). The Court has reviewed the case authority cited by defendant’s counsel

20

for this proposition and concludes these cases hold the opposite. To wit: that the practice of

21

failing to identify third-party reviewers by name violates ERISA. Simonia v. Glendale

22

Nissan/Infiniti Disability Plan, 378 Fed. App’x 725, 727 (9th Cir. 2010) (assuming without

23

deciding that the failure to identify a medical reviewer violates ERISA); Lukas v. United

24

Behavioral Health, No. 09-2423, 2011 WL 1459157, at *17 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 15, 2011) (“The

25

Plan Administrator did not provide the name of the physician to plaintiffs. This resulted in a

26

violation of ERISA procedures.”); Gaines v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., No. 09-1762, 2010

27

WL 1759579, at *7 (D. Md. Apr. 30, 2010) (ERISA’s plain language compels an administrator

28

to identify a medical consultant upon plaintiff’s request).

1

It appears that defendant’s counsel Adam Pines has violated California Rule of

2

Professional Conduct 5-200, which states that a member of the bar “[s]hall not seek to mislead

3

the judge, judicial officer, or jury by an artifice or false statement of fact or law.” The Court

4

hereby issues an ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE why a referral or other sanction should not be

5

imposed upon Adam Pines for this conduct. Adam Pines shall respond to this order by

6

DECEMBER 6 AT NOON.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
Dated: November 26, 2012.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2