MAINE COAST MEMORIAL HOSPITAL v. SEBELIUS

Filing 29

ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE re 25 Report and Recommendations. denying 13 Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record; granting 14 Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record. Denying 27 Motion for Oral Argument. By JUDGE NANCY TORRESEN. (dfr)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE MAINE COAST MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, Plaintiff, v. KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil No. 1:13-cv-00138-NT ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on November 13, 2013, her Recommended Decision (ECF No. 25). The Plaintiff filed its Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 26) on November 26, 2013. The Plaintiff filed her Response to the Defendant’s objections (ECF No. 28) on December 12, 2013. I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in her Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. It is therefore ORDERED that: 1. The Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED; 2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record (ECF No. 13) is DENIED; 3. The Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record (ECF No. 14) is GRANTED; 4. Plaintiff’s Motion for Oral Argument (ECF. No 27) is DENIED; and, 5. The Secretary’s administrative decision is hereby AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED. /s/ Nancy Torresen UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated this 6th day of January, 2014. 2

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?