Valley Health System, LLC et al v. Aetna Health, Inc. et al

Filing 130

ORDER denying 58 Motion to Dismiss.; denying 69 Motion to Compel.; denying 70 Motion to Compel.; denying 92 Motion to Strike.; denying 124 Motion.; granting 128 Stipulation. The parties shall file a stipulation of dismissal by Fe bruary 17, 2017, or a joint status update as to why a stipulation of dismissal could not be timely filed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all hearings in this matter be, and the same hereby are, VACATED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all deadlines in this matter be, and the same hereby are, STAYED. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 2/1/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM LLC, et al.,

8

Plaintiff(s),

9
10

Case No. 2:15-CV-1457 JCM (NJK)
ORDER

v.
AETNA HEALTH, INC., et al.,

11

Defendant(s).

12
13
14

Presently before the court is the matter of Valley Health System, LLC et al. v. Aetna Health,
Inc. et al., case number 2:15-cv-01457-JCM-NJK.

15

On January 30, 2017, the parties filed a stipulation to vacate all hearing dates and deadlines,

16

stating that the parties have settled all claims and counterclaims at issue. (ECF No. 128). The

17

parties anticipate filing a stipulation to dismiss the week of February 13, 2017. (ECF No. 128).

18

In light of the foregoing, the court will grant the parties’ stipulation. (ECF No. 128).

19

Accordingly,

20

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties stipulation (ECF No. 128) be, and the same

21

hereby is, GRANTED.

22

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file a stipulation of dismissal by

23

February 17, 2017, or a joint status update as to why a stipulation of dismissal could not be timely

24

filed.

25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all hearings in this matter be, and the same hereby are,
VACATED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all deadlines in this matter be, and the same hereby are,
STAYED.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss defendants’ counterclaim
(ECF No. 58) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motions to compel discovery (ECF Nos. 69,
70) be, and the same hereby are, DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion strike (ECF No. 92) be, and the same
hereby is, DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants’ motion for leave to supplement the record
(ECF No. 124) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED as moot
DATED February 1, 2017.
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-