Huitt v. Optumhealth

Filing 116

Opinion and Order - Plaintiff's Motion (ECF 115 ) for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on appeal is GRANTED. Signed on 12/5/2016 by Judge Anna J. Brown. (mja)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

SUSAN HUITT,
Plaintiff,
v.
OPTUM HEALTH SERVICES, a
wholly-owned subsidiary of
UNITED HEALTH GROUP, INC.,
Defendant.

SUSAN HUITT
16617 S.E. Naegeli Drive
Portland, OR 97236
[phone]
Plaintiff, Pro Se
SARAH J. RYAN
APRIL L. UPCHURCH FREDRICKSON
Jackson Lewis PC
1001 S.W. Fifth Avenue
Suite 1205
Portland, OR 97204
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendants

1 - OPINION AND ORDER

3:14-CV-01064-BR
OPINION AND ORDER

BROWN, Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Susan
Huitt’s Motion (#115) for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on
appeal.

For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS

Plaintiff’s Motion.

BACKGROUND
On June 2, 2014, Plaintiff filed a pro se complaint in
Multnomah County Circuit Court asserting claims for disability
discrimination in violation of Oregon Revised Statute § 659A.112,
whistleblower retaliation in violation of Oregon Revised Statutes
§§ 659A.199 and 659A.230, and wrongful termination.
On July 2, 2014, Defendant Optum Health Services removed the
matter to this Court on the basis of diversity and federalquestion jurisdiction.
On August 8, 2016, Defendant filed a Motion for Summary
Judgment.

The Court took Defendant’s Motion under advisement on

October 6, 2016.
On November 1, 2016, the Court issued an Opinion and Order
in which it granted Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and
dismissed this matter with prejudice.
On November 1, 2016, the Court entered a Judgment dismissing
this matter with prejudice.
On November 30, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal to
2 - OPINION AND ORDER

the Ninth Circuit and a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis on appeal.

DISCUSSION
“An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial
court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.”
28 U.S.C. § 1915(c).

“‘An appeal is frivolous if the results are

obvious, or the arguments of error are wholly without merit.’”
Kwasniewski v. Sanofi-Aventis U.S., LLC, 637 F. App’x 405, 407
(9th Cir. 2016)(citing Maisano v. United States, 908 F.2d 408,
411 (9th Cir. 1990)).
Although the Court granted Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment as to all of Plaintiff’s claims, the Court notes several
of Plaintiff’s claims involved a close examination of the facts
and/or evolving questions of preemption.

The Court, therefore,

concludes Plaintiff’s claims and arguments were not wholly
without merit nor was the result of Defendant’s Motion for
Summary Judgment obvious.

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS

Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on
appeal.

CONCLUSION
For these reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion

3 - OPINION AND ORDER

(#115) for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on appeal.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 5th day of December, 2016.

/s/ Anna J. Brown
ANNA J. BROWN
United States District Judge

4 - OPINION AND ORDER