Doe v. Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania et al
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry) - it is hereby ORDERED that the motions (Doc. 26, 39) to dismiss are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. SEE ORDER FOR COMPLETE DETAILS. Signed by Honorable Christopher C. Conner on 3/31/2021. (mw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PENNSYLVANIA, et al.,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-2193
AND NOW, this 31st day of March, 2021, upon consideration of the motions
(Docs. 26, 39) to dismiss plaintiff John Doe’s amended complaint (Doc. 25), filed by
defendants Highmark Health Insurance1 and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
and its Department of Human Services, and the parties’ respective briefs in support
of and opposition to said motion, and for the reasons set forth in the accompanying
memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that:
The motions (Doc. 26, 39) to dismiss are GRANTED in part and
DENIED in part as follows:
Highmark’s motion (Doc. 26) is DENIED as to Counts VIII and
Highmark’s motion (Doc. 26) is GRANTED with prejudice as to
Counts I, II, III, and V.
Commonwealth defendants’ motion (Doc. 39) is GRANTED as to
Counts III, V, XIII, and XIV.
Named insurance defendants include Highmark Health Insurance
Company; HM Health Insurance Company; Highmark Health; Highmark, Inc.;
Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield; and/or Highmark (collectively, “Highmark”).
(See Doc. 25 ¶ 14).
Commonwealth defendants’ motion (Doc. 39) is GRANTED
without prejudice to Doe’s right to amend as to Counts I, II, VII,
VIII, and IX.
Doe’s deadline for filing a second amended complaint is DEFERRED
pending service on the Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund
defendants. Doe may file an omnibus amended complaint consistent
with the accompanying memorandum and this order within 14 days of
service upon the remaining defendants.
/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER
Christopher C. Conner
United States District Judge
Middle District of Pennsylvania
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?