Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

WILLIAM C. LINDSAY and LINDSAY, RAPPAPORT & POSTEL, LLC,
Plaintiffs, vs.

Case No.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, in her official capacity as the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY; NEAL WOLIN, in his official capacity as the Acting Secretary of the United States Department of the Treasury; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; and SETH D. HARRIS, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the United States Department of Labor,
Defendants.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Plaintiffs, William C. Lindsay, and Lindsay, Rappaport & Postel, LLC, by and through

their attorneys, bring this complaint against Defendants, United States Department of Health

and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin,

United States Department of Labor, and Seth D. Harris, and their successors in office and in

support thereof allege the following on information and belief:

INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiffs seek judicial review concerning Defendants’ violations of constitutional

and statutory provisions in connection with Defendants’ promulgation and implementation of

certain regulations adopted under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010

(hereafter “Affordable Care Act”), specifically those regulations mandating that non-exempt

employers pay for, as part of employee health benefit plans, certain goods and services,

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 2 of 15 PageID #:2

regardless of whether paying for such goods and services violates the employer’s religious and moral values.
2. Plaintiffs ask this Court for declaratory and injunctive relief from the operation of a rule promulgated by Defendants in or about February 2012 mandating that employee health benefit plans include coverage, without cost-sharing, for “all Food and Drug Administrationapproved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity” in plan years beginning on or after August 1, 2012, (hereafter “the Mandate”). 45 CFR § 147.130(a)(1)(iv), as confirmed at 77 Fed. Reg. 8725 (Feb. 15, 2012), adopting and quoting Guidelines issued by the Health Resources and Services Administration (hereafter “HRSA”) found at http://www.hrsa.gov/womensguidelines.
3. Plaintiff, William C. Lindsay (“Lindsay”), is an adherent of the Catholic faith. Lindsay owns the controlling interest in Plaintiff, Lindsay, Rappaport & Postel, LLC (“LR&P”), a n d wishes to conduct t h e business of L R & P in a manner that does not violate his religious faith.
4. Lindsay has concluded that complying with the Mandate would require him to violate his religious beliefs because the Mandate requires him and/or LR&P to pay for, and provide, not only contraception and sterilization, but also abortion, because certain drugs and devices that Lindsay has concluded have abortion-causing mechanisms of action, such as the “morning-after pill,” “Plan B,” and “Ella,” come within the Mandate’s and HRSA’s definition of “Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptive methods.”
5. Plaintiffs contend that the Mandate directly pressures them to either (1) comply with the Mandate and violate their religious beliefs and moral values or (2) incur ruinous fines and penalties if they choose to continue to conduct their business consistent with their religious

	  

2

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 3 of 15 PageID #:3

beliefs and moral values. Accordingly, Plaintiffs contend that the Mandate violates their rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment, and also violates the Administrative Procedure Act.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343(a)(4), and 1346(a)(2) because it is a civil action against agencies and officials of the United States based on claims arising under the Constitution, laws of the United States, and regulations of executive departments and it seeks equitable or other relief under an Act of Congress, and also pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1361 as this Court may compel officers and agencies of the United States to perform a duty owed Plaintiffs. 7. This Court has jurisdiction to render declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 702, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2202, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-1, and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 57 and 65. 8. Venue is appropriate in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(1)(B)(C) because Plaintiffs reside in this district, and a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to Plaintiffs’ claims occurred in this district. 9. This Court has the authority to award Plaintiffs their costs and attorneys’ fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412 and 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
PLAINTIFFS 10. Plaintiff, William C. Lindsay, is an individual and citizen of the State of Illinois and the United States. 11. Lindsay owns the controlling interest in Plaintiff, Lindsay, Rappaport & Postel, LLC, and is its managing partner.

	  

3

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 4 of 15 PageID #:4

12. Lindsay and the other name partners of LR&P, Stuart Rappaport and Joseph Postel, set the policies governing the conduct of all phases of LR&P. In the event the name partners cannot reach a consensus, the decision of Lindsay controls as the partner who owns the controlling interest in LR&P. Partner Joseph Postel is also an adherent of the Catholic faith and shares the same objections to the Mandate as Lindsay.
13. LR&P is a law firm that primarily practices in insurance defense, insurance coverage, and appellate work, serving clients in the Chicago area and throughout Illinois f or over ten years. Its main offices are located at 10 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois, which is in Cook County and 221 North West Street, Waukegan, Illinois, which is in Lake County. It is incorporated under the laws of the State of Illinois.
DEFENDANTS 14. Defendant, United States Department of Health and Human Services (hereafter “HHS”), is an agency of the United States and is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Mandate. 15. Defendant, Kathleen Sebelius, is Secretary of HHS and is named as a party only in her official capacity. 16. Defendant, United States Department of the Treasury, is an agency of the United States and is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Mandate. 17. Defendant, Neal Wolin, is A c t i n g Secretary of the Treasury and is named as a party only in his official capacity. 18. Defendant, United States Department of Labor (hereafter “DOL”), is an agency of the United States and is responsible for t h e administration and enforcement of the Mandate.

	  

4

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 5 of 15 PageID #:5

19. Defendant, Seth D. Harris, is Acting Secretary of DOL and is named as a party

only in his official capacity.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

20. Plaintiff Lindsay is a Catholic. In furtherance of his Catholic faith, Lindsay, along

with his wife, Suzanne, strongly supports, financially and otherwise, Catholic organizations,

including, but not limited to, his local Parish, St. Mary of the Annunciation, Food for the Poor,

Catholic Charities, Holy Family Food Pantry, Catholic Relief Services, St. Mary of the Lake

Mundelein Seminary, Mercy Home for Boys and Girls, Christian Foundation for Children and

Aging, and Archdiocese of Chicago Annual Catholic Appeal. He also supports, financially and

otherwise, pro-life organizations, including Lake County Right to Life, the Women’s Center for

Greater Chicagoland, and Students for Life. Also, through their church ministries, the Lindsays

volunteer and financially support Public Aid to Deliver Shelter, Facilitating Open Couple

Communication, Understanding & Study, St. Vincent De Paul and its Thrift Store, and Blessed

Trinity Church.

21. Lindsay seeks to manage and operate LR&P in a way that reflects the teachings,

mission, and values of his Catholic faith.

22. Lindsay adheres to the Catholic Church’s teachings regarding the immorality

of abortion, artificial means of contraception, and sterilization.

23. Lindsay believes that it is not only sinful for him to engage in such practices, but

it is also sinful for him, whether acting individually or through his law firm, to directly pay for,

facilitate, or otherwise encourage other people to do so by purchasing coverage for

contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs as part of an employee health plan. In

other words, direct subsidization of immoral goods or services is itself an immoral act that

Lindsay’s faith forbids, regardless of whether those goods or services are ever utilized by others.

	  

5

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 6 of 15 PageID #:6

Lindsay has established ethical guidelines for his law firm setting forth these beliefs. 24. The Mandate requires Plaintiffs to directly pay for and provide such goods and
services by requiring that they be added to any group health plan established or renewed after August 1, 2012.
25. LR&P currently has about seventeen full-time employees and provides a group health insurance plan for its full-time employees.
26. The annual renewal date of the company’s group health plan for its full-time employees is April 1.
27. Like other non-cash benefits provided by LR&P, Plaintiffs consider the provision of employee health insurance an integral component of furthering the company’s mission and values. Being forced to cease providing group health coverage to LR&P’s employees (which Plaintiffs have no intention of doing) would harm both Plaintiffs and their employees.
28. Lindsay believes that he and his law firm should not be put to the choice of either ceasing to provide group health care for the firm’s employees or paying for and providing health care coverage that includes contraceptives, sterilization, abortion-inducing drugs, or related education and counseling, in violation of his religious beliefs and the firm’s ethical guidelines.
APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE MANDATE 29. Under the Mandate being challenged herein, non-exempt employers, such as LR&P, that provide health insurance coverage for their full-time employees are required to include coverage for all FDA-approved contraceptive methods, sterilization, and related education and counseling. 30. The Mandate went into effect on August 1, 2012, and applies to the first health

	  

6

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 7 of 15 PageID #:7

insurance plan-year starting after August 1, 2012.

31. The group health plan for LR&P’s employees is due for renewal on April 1,

2013. In or about August 2012, Plaintiffs’ insurance agent advised upon inquiry that LR&P’s

current group health plan excludes coverage for contraceptives and sterilization. In January

2013, however, Plaintiffs’ insurance agent advised that he was mistaken and that LR&P’s current

group health plan includes coverage for contraceptives, sterilization, and abortion. This was an

error contrary to Lindsay’s religious beliefs and contrary to LR&P’s ethical guidelines. The

company is investigating ways to obtain employee health insurance coverage that complies with Lindsay’s Catholic faith and the company’s ethical guidelines.1

32. Plaintiffs wish to renew health insurance coverage for their full-time employees

while, at the same time, excluding coverage for all FDA-approved contraceptive methods,

abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling

regarding such products and procedures.

33. Under the terms of the Mandate, Plaintiffs will not be permitted to obtain

coverage that excludes the aforementioned drugs and services. On the contrary, the Mandate

will require that Plaintiffs continue to pay for and provide coverage of those drugs and

services.

34. Plaintiffs, as for-profit employers, do not qualify for the Mandate’s “religious

employer” exemption. See 45 CFR § 147.130(a)(1)(A) and (B).

	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  		    	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  		     1 The State of Illinois requires coverage for outpatient contraceptive services and drugs in
individual and group health insurance policies. 215 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 5/356z.4. Yet, the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act, 745 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 70/1, et seq., provides “health care payers,” 745 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 70/3(f), such as Plaintiffs, with an exemption from having to pay for, or having to arrange for the payment of, any health care services, including “family planning, counseling, referrals, or any other advice in connection with the use or procurement of contraceptives and sterilization or abortion procedures; medication; or surgery or other care or treatment,” 745 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 70/3(a), that violates the health care payer’s conscience as documented in its ethical guidelines or the like, 745 Ill. Comp. Stat. §§ 70/2, 70/3(e), 70/11.2.	  

	  

7

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 8 of 15 PageID #:8

35. Because Plaintiffs do not qualify for the “religious employer” exemption, they are not permitted to take advantage of the “temporary enforcement safe-harbor” provision established by Defendants. See 77 Fed. Reg. 8725 (Feb. 15, 2012).
36. Health insurance plans in existence as of the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (March 23, 2010) that do not include coverage for all FDA-approved contraceptive methods, sterilization, and related education and counseling and that have not since been materially changed are considered “grandfathered” plans that do not have to comply with the Mandate. According to the Defendants’ own estimates, 98 million employees are currently enrolled in “grandfathered” plans that are not subject to the Mandate.
37. The Mandate coerces Plaintiffs to abandon integral components of their religiously inspired mission and values.
38. Failure to comply with the Mandate would likely require LR&P to pay ruinous annual fines and penalties to the federal government. Under 26 U.S.C. § 4980D, Plaintiffs would likely face over $620,000 in penalties for each year that they provide an insurance plan for their approximately seventeen full-time employees that does not cover the goods and services that Plaintiffs’ faith forbids them from directly subsidizing.
39. The Mandate pressures Plaintiffs i n t o choosing between complying with the Mandate’s requirements in violation of their religious beliefs and moral values or paying ruinous fines that would have a crippling impact on their ability to survive economically. The Mandate, therefore, imposes a substantial burden on Plaintiffs’ religious exercise.
40. Any alleged interest Defendants have in providing free FDA-approved contraceptives, abortifacients, and sterilization and related education and counseling services, without cost-sharing, is not compelling as applied to Plaintiffs. In addition, any such interest

	  

8

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 9 of 15 PageID #:9

could be advanced by Defendants through other more narrowly tailored means that do not require Plaintiffs to pay for and otherwise support coverage of such items through their employee health plan in violation of their religious beliefs and moral values.
41. Plaintiffs lack an adequate or available administrative remedy or, in the alternative, any effort to obtain an administrative remedy would be futile.
42. Plaintiffs lack an adequate remedy at law. CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT I
(Violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act) 43. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 4 2 above and incorporate those allegations herein by reference. 44. Plaintiffs have sincerely held religious beliefs that forbid them from arranging for, paying for, or providing coverage for “all FDA-approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling related to such procedures.” 45. The Mandate, by requiring Plaintiffs to pay for or provide said coverage, imposes a substantial burden on Plaintiffs’ free exercise of religion by coercing Plaintiffs to choose between conducting their business in violation of their religious beliefs and moral values or paying substantial penalties to the government. 46. The Mandate furthers no compelling governmental interest, nor is it necessary to prevent any concrete harm to such an interest. 47. The Mandate is not narrowly tailored to furthering any compelling interest. 48. The Mandate is not the least restrictive means of furthering the Defendants’ stated interests. 49. The Mandate and Defendants’ threatened enforcement of the Mandate violates

	  

9

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 10 of 15 PageID #:10

rights secured to Plaintiffs by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb, et seq.
50. Absent injunctive and declaratory relief against the Mandate, Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm, and they request the relief set forth below in their request for relief.
COUNT II (Violation of the Federal Free Exercise Clause) 51. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 50 above and incorporate those allegations herein by reference. 52. Plaintiffs have sincerely held religious beliefs that forbid them from arranging for, paying for, or providing coverage for “all FDA-approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling related to such procedures.” 53. The Mandate, by requiring Plaintiffs to pay for or provide said coverage, imposes a substantial burden on Plaintiffs’ free exercise of religion by coercing Plaintiffs to choose between conducting their business in violation of their religious beliefs and moral values or paying substantial penalties to the government. 54. The Mandate furthers no compelling governmental interest, nor is it necessary to prevent any concrete harm to such an interest. 55. The Mandate is not narrowly tailored to furthering any compelling interest. 56. The Mandate is not the least restrictive means of furthering the Defendants’ stated interests. 57. The Mandate is neither neutral nor generally applicable. 58. The Mandate and Defendants’ threatened enforcement of the Mandate violates Plaintiffs’ rights to free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United

	  

10

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 11 of 15 PageID #:11

States Constitution. 59. Absent injunctive and declaratory relief against the Mandate, Plaintiffs will suffer
irreparable harm, and they request the relief set forth below in their Request for Relief. COUNT III
(Violation of the Federal Free Speech Clause) 60. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 59 above and incorporate those allegations herein by reference. 61. The First Amendment protects organizations as well as individuals from being compelled to speak and, in many circumstances, from being compelled to subsidize the speech of others. 62. Expenditures of money are a form of protected speech. 63. The Mandate compels Plaintiffs to pay for or provide coverage for education and counseling related to contraception, abortion, and sterilization, which is speech to which Plaintiffs morally object. 64. Plaintiffs believe that the aforementioned services, activities, and practices covered by the Mandate are contrary to their sincerely-held religious beliefs. 65. The Mandate compels Plaintiffs to subsidize goods, services, activities, practices, and speech that Plaintiffs believe to be immoral and, thereby, violates Plaintiffs’ right to be free from governmental compulsion to utter, subsidize, or support speech with which Plaintiffs disagree on religious and moral grounds. 66. The Mandate and Defendants’ threatened enforcement of the Mandate violates Plaintiffs’ free speech rights as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

	  

11

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 12 of 15 PageID #:12

67. Absent injunctive and declaratory relief against the Mandate, Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm, and they request the relief set forth below in their request for relief.
COUNT I V (Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act) 68. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 67 above and incorporate those allegations herein by reference. 69. The Affordable Care Act expressly delegates to the HRSA, an agency within Defendant United States Department of Health and Human Services, the authority to establish “preventive care” guidelines that a group health plan and health insurance issuer must provide. 70. Given this express delegation, Defendants were obliged to engage in formal notice and comment rulemaking as prescribed by law before Defendants issued the guidelines to which group health plans and insurers must conform. See 5 U.S.C. § 553. 71. Proposed regulations were required to be published in the Federal Register and interested persons were required to be given a chance to take part in the rulemaking through the submission of written data, views, or arguments. 72. Defendants promulgated the “preventive care” guidelines without engaging in the formal notice and comment rulemaking as prescribed by law. Defendants delegated the responsibilities for issuing “preventive care” guidelines to a non-governmental entity, the Institute of Medicine, which did not permit or provide for broad public comment otherwise required by the Administrative Procedure Act. 73. Defendants also failed to engage in the required notice and comment rulemaking when Defendants issued the interim final rules and the final rule that incorporates the “preventive care” guidelines. 74. The Mandate violates Section 1303(b)(1)(A) of the Affordable Care Act, which

	  

12

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 13 of 15 PageID #:13

provides that “nothing in this title . . . shall be construed to require a qualified health plan to provide coverage of [abortion] services . . . as part of its essential health benefits for any plan year.” 42 U.S.C.A. § 18023(b)(1)(A)(i) (codification of Section 1303 of the Affordable Care Act).
75. The Mandate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as set forth in this complaint.
76. The Mandate violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as set forth in this complaint.
77. Defendants, in promulgating the Mandate, failed to consider the constitutional and statutory implications of the Mandate for for-profit employers such as Plaintiffs.
78. The Mandate and Defendants’ actions are arbitrary and capricious, not in accordance with law or required procedure, and contrary to constitutional right, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2).
79. Absent injunctive and declaratory relief against the Mandate, Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm, and they request the relief set forth below in their request for relief.
REQUEST FOR RELIEF 80. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege all allegations made above and incorporate those allegations herein by reference, and Plaintiffs request that this Court grant them the following relief and enter final judgment against Defendants and in favor of Plaintiffs: A. Enter a declaratory judgment that the Mandate and Defendants’ enforcement of the Mandate against Plaintiffs violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act; B. Enter a declaratory judgment that the Mandate and Defendants’ enforcement of the Mandate against Plaintiffs violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the

	  

13

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 14 of 15 PageID #:14
United States Constitution; C. Enter a declaratory judgment that the Mandate and Defendants’ enforcement
of the Mandate against Plaintiffs violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution;
D. Enter a declaratory judgment that the Mandate and Defendants’ enforcement of the Mandate against Plaintiffs violates the Administrative Procedure Act;
E. Enter preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, successors in office, attorneys, and those acting in active concert or participation with them, including any insurance carriers or third party plan administrators, from applying and enforcing the Mandate and any related regulations, rules, statutes, laws, penalties, fines or assessments against Plaintiffs; and prohibiting Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, successors in office, attorneys, and those acting in active concert or participation with them from applying and enforcing the Mandate against any insurance carriers or third party plan administrators with whom Plaintiffs may seek to contract with respect to the provision or administration of an employee health plan for Plaintiffs’ employees;
F. Award Plaintiffs their costs and attorney’s fees associated with this action; and G. Award Plaintiffs any further relief this court deems equitable and just.

	  

14

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/14/13 Page 15 of 15 PageID #:15

Dated this 14th day of February, 2013

Edward L. White III American Center for Law & Justice 5068 Plymouth Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48105 Tel: (734) 662-2984; Fax: (734) 302-1758 ewhite@aclj.org
Erik M. Zimmerman* American Center for Law & Justice 1000 Regent University Drive Virginia Beach, Virginia 23464 Tel. (757) 226-2489; Fax. (757) 226-2836 ezimmerman@aclj.org

/s/ Francis J. Manion Francis J. Manion Geoffrey R. Surtees American Center for Law & Justice PO Box 60 New Hope, KY 40052 Tel: (502) 549-7020; Fax: (502) 549-5252 fmanion@aclj.org, gsurtees@aclj.org
Carly Gammill* American Center for Law & Justice 188 Front St., Ste. 116-19 Franklin, TN 37064 Tel. (615) 415-4822; Fax: (615) 599-5189 cgammill@aclj-dc.org
*Admission pending

	  

15

 
 Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 21 Filed: 03/20/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:91

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

WILLIAM C. LINDSAY and LINDSAY, )

RAPPAPORT & POSTEL LLC,

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

v.

)

)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF )

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, )

KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, in her official )

capacity as the Secretary of the United )

States Department of Health and

)

Human Services, UNITED STATES

)

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, )

NEAL WOLIN, in his official capacity )

as Secretary of the United States

)

Department of the Treasury, UNITED )

STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, )

and SETH D. Harris, in his official

)

capacity as Acting Secretary of the )

United States Department of Labor,

)

)

Defendants.

)

No. 13 C 1210 Judge Ronald A. Guzmán

AGREED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

By agreement of the parties, the Court preliminarily enjoins defendants from enforcing 45

C.F.R. § 147.130(a)(1)(iv), conf irmed at 77 Fed. Reg. 8725 (Feb. 15, 2012) , which requires

employee health plans to include “ coverage, without cost-sha ring, for all Food and Drug

Administration approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures and patient education and

counseling for all women with reproductive capacity, as prescribed by a provider” in plan years

beginning on or after August 1, 2012, pending the Seve nth Circuit’s decision in the consolidated

appeals in Korte v. Sebelius, No. 12-3841 and Grote v. Sebelius, No. 13-077.

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 21 Filed: 03/20/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:92

This injunction will remain in effect until thirty days after the Seventh Circuit issues the

mandate in the Korte and Grote appeals.

SO ORDERED.

ENTER: March 20, 2013

__________________________________ HON. RONALD A. GUZMAN United States District Judge

2

 
 Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 25 Filed: 10/07/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:99
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
GENERAL ORDER 13-0018
GENERAL ORDER HOLDING IN ABEYANCE CIVIL MATTERS INVOLVING THE UNITED STATES AS A PARTY
This matter is before the Court due to the lapse of congressional appropriations funding the federal government, including the Department of Justice and the United States Attorney’s Office. Absent an appropriation, the United States represents that certain Department of Justice attorneys and employees of the federal government are prohibited from working, even on a voluntary basis, except in very limited circumstances, including “emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property.” 31 U.S.C. § 1342. Therefore, the lapse in appropriations requires a reduction in the workforce of the United States Attorney’s Office and other federal agencies, particularly with respect to prosecution and defense of civil cases. The Court, in response, and with the intent to avoid any default or prejudice to the United States or other civil litigants occasioned by the lapse in funding, sua sponte enters this General Order.
As a result of the cited workforce reductions, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, effective October 1, 2013, that all civil litigation involving as a party the United States of America, its agencies, its officers or employees (whether in their individual or official capacity and whether current or former employees), and/or any other party represented by the Department of Justice or the United States Attorney’s Office is immediately suspended, postponed and held in abeyance continuing for a period of fourteen (14) days from the date of entry of this General Order. The Court may renew or modify this General Order depending on developments in the stay period. The Court intends “civil litigation” to include all pending non-criminal cases in which the United States, its agencies, its officers or employees (whether in their individual or official capacity and whether current or former employees) is in any way a named party and any non-criminal cases in which the United States Attorney’s Office or the Department of Justice is counsel of record. This includes, without limitation, all pending Social Security cases and all cases seeking monetary or equitable relief in which the United States is involved as a civil litigant. The General Order does not affect habeas corpus cases pending or filed under Chapter 153 of Title 28.

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 25 Filed: 10/07/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:100

This General Order suspends and continues, during the stay, any and all events and deadlines in the affected civil litigation (whether established by order, rule, or agreement), including but not limited to any scheduled proceedings, hearings, and/or discovery and pleading dates. No party will be required to take any steps in civil litigation affected until expiration of the stay. The Court warns litigants that this General Order does not purport to affect rights to or deadlines concerning appeal from any decision of this Court, which will continue to operate and issue orders in the normal course.
Any litigant affected by this General Order may seek relief from the order by motion. The Court may, in any particular case, vary the effect or operation of this General Order by a separate ruling.
The Court shall distribute this General Order : (a) by electronic service to all registered CM/ECF users;

(b) by first-class mail to unregistered civil litigants, including pro se litigants, and to attorneys pending pro hac vice admission; and

(c)

by posting the General Order on the Court’s public website.

The Court shall clarify the status of case schedules upon expiration of the stay and dependent on the timing of the funding resolution.

ENTER: FOR THE COURT

____________________________

Rubén Castillo

Chief

District Judge

Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 7th day of October, 2013

2

 
 Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 26 Filed: 10/17/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:101
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
GENERAL ORDER 13-0019
RESETTING OF DEADLINES IN CIVIL MATIERS INVOLVING THE UNITED STATES AS A PARTY
IT APPEARING THAT as a result of the partial federal government shutdown, this Court issued General Order 13-0018 suspending as of October 1, 2013, all civil litigation in which the United States of America, its agencies, its officers, or employees were parties, with the stated intention of clarifying schedules in such cases upon the expiration of the lapse in appropriations; and
IT FURTHER APPEARING THAT appropriations having been restored to fund the Department of Justice and other Executive Branch agencies, with employees beginning to report for work beginning on October 17, 2013; accordingly
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the stay entered by General Order 13-0018 is hereby lifted, and any and all deadlines in the affected civil litigation (whether established by order, rule, or agreement), including but not limited to any scheduled discovery and pleading dates, are extended by 28 days. The Court warns litigants that this General Order does not purport to affect rights to or deadlines concerning appeal from any decision of this Court. Any litigant affected by this General Order may seek relief from the order by motion. Trial dates in the affected cases will stand, although they may need to be adjusted in individual cases to account for the extension of other dates. The Court may, in any particular case, vary the effect or operation of this General Order by a separate ruling.
The Court shall distribute this General Order :
(a) by electronic service to all registered CM/ECF users;
(b) by first-class mail to unregistered civil litigants, including prose litigants, and to attorneys pending pro hac vice admission; and
(c) by posting the General Order on the Court's public website.
ENTER: FOR THE COURT
~
Ruben Castillo Chief District Judge
Dated in Chicago, Illinois this 17th day of October, 2013.

 
 Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 27 Filed: 01/10/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:102

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

WILLIAM C. LINDSAY and LINDSAY, RAPPAPORT & POSTEL, LLC,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CASE NO. 1:13-CV-01210

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, in her official capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY; JACK LEW, in his official capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of the Treasury; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; and SETH HARRIS, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the United States Department of Labor,

Defendants. _______________________________________/

PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

Plaintiffs, William Lindsay and Lindsay, Rappaport & Postel, LLC, by and through their

undersigned counsel, hereby submit this unopposed motion to extend both the preliminary

injunction and stay of proceedings currently in place in this case pending the resolution of two

cases before the United States Supreme Court: Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., No. 13-354

(S. Ct.), cert. granted, Nov. 26, 2013, and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius, No.

13-356 (S. Ct.), cert. granted, Nov. 26, 2013. These two cases involve claims that are

substantially similar to the legal claims Plaintiffs bring here against the same federal regulations

that Plaintiffs challenge here.

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 27 Filed: 01/10/14 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:103
On March 20, 2013 (Dkts # 20 and 21), this Court entered a preliminary injunction and stay of proceedings in this case pending the disposition of two cases then before the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit: Korte v. Sebelius, No. 12-3841 (7th Cir.), consolidated with Grote Indus. LLC v. Sebelius, No. 13-077 (7th Cir.) According to this Court’s order, the preliminary injunction and stay of proceedings are to remain in place until thirty days after the issuance of the mandate in these cases.
On November 9, 2013, the Seventh Circuit decided the Korte and Grote cases. 735 F.3d 654. The court ruled that the contraception mandate substantially burdens the religious exercise of the plaintiff corporations and their owners under the Religious Freedom Act. The court further ruled that the mandate does not serve a compelling governmental interest and is not the least restrictive means of advancing any such interest. The Seventh Circuit remanded the cases with instructions to enter preliminary injunctions barring enforcement of the contraception mandate against the plaintiffs.
On December 31, 2013, the mandate was issued in Korte and Grote. (A copy of the Notice of Issuance of Mandate is attached hereto as Exhibit A.)
Plaintiffs move this Court to extend the preliminary injunction and stay of proceedings in this case until forty-five days after the Supreme Court issues judgment in Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood. In these cases, the Supreme Court will address legal issues that are substantially similar to those presented in this case, involving facts that are analogous in many respects to those in this case, challenging the same regulations that are challenged in this case, and raising claims that are largely indistinguishable from those in this case brought against the same Defendants as those in this case. Even if the Supreme Court’s rulings do not entirely

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 27 Filed: 01/10/14 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:104
dispose of this case, the outcome of the decisions in Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood are likely to affect substantially the outcome of this litigation.
Defendants have advised undersigned counsel that they do not oppose this motion. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs respectfully ask this Court to grant their unopposed motion for an extension of the current preliminary injunction, enjoining Defendants, until fortyfive days after the Supreme Court issues judgment in Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood, from enforcing against Plaintiffs, their employee health plan(s), or their insurer(s) the statute and regulations that require Plaintiffs to provide employees insurance coverage for “[a]ll Food and Drug Administration approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity,” 77 Fed. Reg. 8725, as well as any penalties, fines, assessments, or enforcement actions for non-compliance, including those found in 26 U.S.C. §§ 4980D, 4980H, and 29 U.S.C. §§ 1132, 1185d.
Plaintiffs further respectfully ask this Court to stay all proceedings in this case until forty-five days after the Supreme Court issues judgment in Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood.

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 27 Filed: 01/10/14 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:105

Respectfully submitted, January 10, 2014.
Edward L. White III American Center for Law & Justice 5068 Plymouth Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 Tel. 734-662-2984; Fax. 734-302-1758 ewhite@aclj.org
Carly Gammill American Center for Law & Justice 188 Front St., Ste. 116-19 Franklin, TN 37064 Tel. (615) 415-4822; Fax: (615) 599-5189 cgammill@aclj-dc.org

/s/ Francis J. Manion Francis J. Manion Geoffrey R. Surtees American Center for Law & Justice 6375 New Hope Road New Hope, Kentucky 40052 Tel. 502-549-7020; Fax. 502-549-5252 fmanion@aclj.org gsurtees@aclj.org
Erik M. Zimmerman American Center for Law & Justice 1000 Regent University Drive Virginia Beach, Virginia 23464 Tel. 757-226-2489; Fax. 757-226-2836 ezimmerman@aclj.org
Counsel for Plaintiffs

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 27 Filed: 01/10/14 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:106
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Francis J. Manion, counsel for Plaintiffs, hereby certify that on _____ a true and correct
copy of the foregoing and attachments were caused to be filed electronically with this Court
through the CM/ECF filing system. Notice of this filing will be sent to all parties for whom
counsel has entered an appearance by operation of the Court’s CM/ECF system, including the
following counsel for Defendants. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s CM/ECF
system.
Michelle Renee Bennett U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20001 202 305 8902 Email: michelle.bennett@usdoj.gov
Benjamin Leon Berwick U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Av., NW Suite 7306 Washington, DC 20012 202 305 8573 Email: benjamin.l.berwick@usdoj.gov
/s/ Francis J. Manion Francis J. Manion American Center for Law & Justice PO Box 60 6375 New Hope Road New Hope, Kentucky 40052

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 27 Filed: 01/10/14 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:107

 
 Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 42 Filed: 10/15/14 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:141

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

____________________________________

)

WILLIAM C. LINDSAY, et al.

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

v.

)

Case No. 1:13-cv-01210

)

SYLVIA M. BURWELL, et al.

)

)

Defendants.

)

____________________________________)

JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF INJUNCTION AND JUDGMENT
In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2751 (2014), the parties jointly agree that judgment should be entered in favor of plaintiffs on their Religious Freedom Restoration Act claim, that a permanent injunction should be entered, that all other claims against defendants should be dismissed, and that the deadline for any petition by plaintiffs for attorneys’ fees or costs should be extended to 60 days after judgment is entered. Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that the Court enter the attached Injunction and Judgment, which has been agreed to by all parties. The parties further request that the pending October 20, 2014 deadline for submission of a joint status report be vacated.
Respectfully submitted this 15th day of October, 2014,

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
_/s/ Francis J. Manion_____________ Francis J. Manion Geoffrey R. Surtees AMERICAN CENTER FOR LAW & JUSTICE PO Box 60 New Hope, KY 40052 Tel: (502) 549-7020; Fax: (502) 549-5252 fmanion@aclj.org, gsurtees@aclj.org

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 42 Filed: 10/15/14 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:142
Edward L. White III AMERICAN CENTER FOR LAW & JUSTICE 5068 Plymouth Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48105 Tel: (734) 662-2984; Fax: (734) 302-1758 ewhite@aclj.org
Attorneys for Defendants JOYCE R. BRANDA Acting Assistant Attorney General ZACHARY T. FARDON United States Attorney JENNIFER RICKETTS Director SHEILA M. LIEBER Deputy Director _/s/ Michelle R. Bennett MICHELLE R. BENNETT (CO Bar No. 37050) Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Avenue N.W. Room 7310 Washington, D.C. 20530 Tel: (202) 305-8902 Fax: (202) 616-8470 Email: michelle.bennett@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Defendants.
2

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 42 Filed: 10/15/14 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:143 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on October 15, 2014, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which sent notice of such filing to all parties.
/s/ Michelle R. Bennett MICHELLE R. BENNETT Trial Attorney
3

 
 Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 50 Filed: 12/03/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:159

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

____________________________________

)

WILLIAM C. LINDSAY, et al.

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

v.

)

Case No. 1:13-cv-01210

)

SYLVIA M. BURWELL, et al.

)

)

Defendants.

)

____________________________________)

INJUNCTION AND JUDGMENT In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2751 (2014), and upon the parties’ Joint Motion for Entry of Injunction and Judgment, it is hereby ORDERED that defendants, their employees, agents, and successors in office are permanently enjoined (a) from enforcing
(1) the “June 30, 2014 Contraceptive Coverage Requirement,” defined here to include those provisions of federal law in existence on June 30, 2014, when the Supreme Court decided Hobby Lobby, that require plaintiff Lindsay, Rappaport & Postel, LLC (hereinafter, “LR&P”) to provide its employees with health coverage for contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and related patient education and counseling to which plaintiffs object on religious grounds, e.g., 26 C.F.R. §

Case: 1:13-cv-01210 Document #: 50 Filed: 12/03/14 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:160

54.9815-2713(a)(1)(iv); 29 C.F.R. § 2590.715-2713(a)(1)(iv); 45 C.F.R. § 147.130(a)(1)(iv); and (2) any penalties, fines, or assessments for noncompliance with the June 30, 2014 Contraceptive Coverage Requirement, including those found in 26 U.S.C. § 4980D and 29 U.S.C. §§ 1132 and 1185d; and (b) from taking any other actions based on noncompliance with the June 30, 2014 Contraceptive Coverage Requirement against plaintiff LR&P, its employee health plan(s), the group health coverage provided in connection with such plan(s), and/or LR&P’s health insurance issuers and/or third-party administrators with respect to LR&P’s health plan(s); and it is further ORDERED that judgment is entered in favor of plaintiffs and against defendants on plaintiffs’ claim under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb et seq.; and it is further ORDERED that all other claims against Defendants are DISMISSED; and it is further ORDERED that any petition by plaintiffs for attorneys’ fees or costs shall be submitted on or before 60 days (or the next business day if that day falls on a weekend or court holiday) from the date this judgment is issued; and it is further ORDERED that this Injunction and Judgment does not apply with respect to any changes in statute or regulation that are enacted or promulgated after this date, and nothing herein prevents plaintiffs from filing a new civil action to challenge any such future changes.

Date: December 3, 2014

________________________________ The Honorable Ronald A. Guzman United States District Judge

2

 
 Case: 1:13-cv-1210 As of: 11/05/2017 11:00 PM CST 1 of 6
FINNEGAN,TERMED
United States District Court Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.1.1.2 (Chicago)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:13−cv−01210

Lindsay, et al v. United States Department of Health and Human Date Filed: 02/14/2013

Services et al

Date Terminated: 11/13/2014

Assigned to: Honorable Ronald A. Guzman

Jury Demand: None

Cause: 28:2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)

Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other

Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant

Plaintiff

Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC

represented by Francis J Manion American Center For Law And Justice PO Box 60 New Hope, KY 40052 (502) 549−5252 Email: fmanion@aclj.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Edward Lawrence White American Center For Law & Justice 3001 Plymouth Road Suite 203 Ann Arbor, MI 48105 (734) 680−8007 Email: ewhite@aclj.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Geoffrey R Surtees American Center For Law And Justice Po Box 60 New Hope, KY 40052 (502) 549−7020 Email: gsurtees@aclj.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff William C Lindsay

represented by Francis J Manion (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Edward Lawrence White (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Geoffrey R Surtees (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
United States Department of Health and Human Services

represented by Benjamin Leon Berwick U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Av., NW Suite 7306 Washington, DC 20012

Case: 1:13-cv-1210 As of: 11/05/2017 11:00 PM CST 2 of 6

202 305 8573 Email: benjamin.l.berwick@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michelle Renee Bennett U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20001 202 305 8902 Email: michelle.bennett@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs.

represented by Benjamin Leon Berwick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michelle Renee Bennett (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
United States Department of the Treasury

represented by Benjamin Leon Berwick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michelle Renee Bennett (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Neal Wolin Neal Wolin, Acting Sec of US Dept of Treasury

represented by Benjamin Leon Berwick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michelle Renee Bennett (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant United States Department of Labor

represented by Benjamin Leon Berwick (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Michelle Renee Bennett (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Seth Harris Acting Sec of US Dept of Labor

represented by Benjamin Leon Berwick (See above for address)

Case: 1:13-cv-1210 As of: 11/05/2017 11:00 PM CST 3 of 6
LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Michelle Renee Bennett (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 02/14/2013 02/14/2013 02/14/2013 02/14/2013 02/14/2013 02/14/2013 02/15/2013 02/15/2013 02/25/2013 02/28/2013 02/28/2013
02/28/2013
03/04/2013 03/04/2013
03/04/2013

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT filed by William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC; Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 0752−8047072.(Manion, Francis) (Entered: 02/14/2013)
2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Manion, Francis) (Entered: 02/14/2013)
3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC by Francis J Manion (Manion, Francis) (Entered: 02/14/2013)
4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC by Geoffrey R Surtees (Surtees, Geoffrey) (Entered: 02/14/2013)
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sheila M. Finnegan. (cft, ) (Entered: 02/14/2013)
5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC by Edward Lawrence White (White, Edward) (Entered: 02/14/2013)
SUMMONS Issued, 4 originals, as to Seth Harris; Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs.; Gary Shapiro, U.S. Attorney; and Eric H. Holder, Jr., U.S. Attorney General. (tlm) (Entered: 02/15/2013)
SUMMONS Issued as to Neal Wolin, Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Treasury. (tlm) (Entered: 02/15/2013)
6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC as to All Defendants (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Manion, Francis) (Entered: 02/25/2013)
7 NOTICE of Motion by Francis J Manion for presentment of before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 3/12/2013 at 09:30 AM. (Manion, Francis) (Entered: 02/28/2013)
8 MOTION by Plaintiffs William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC for preliminary injunction (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit Declaration of William Lindsay, # 3 Exhibit Triune Health v. U.S. Order)(Manion, Francis) (Entered: 02/28/2013)
9 MINUTE entry before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: The Court orders the parties to appear for an initial status hearing. All parties shall refer to and comply with Judge Guzman's requirements for the initial appearance as outlined in Judge Guzman's case management procedures, which can be found at: www.ilnd.uscourts.gov. Status hearing set for 4/19/2013 at 09:30 AM. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 02/28/2013)
10 SUMMONS Returned Executed by William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC as to All Defendants (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Manion, Francis) (Entered: 03/04/2013)
11 SUMMONS Returned Executed by William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC as to Seth Harris served on 2/25/2013, answer due 4/26/2013; United States Department of Labor served on 2/25/2013, answer due 4/26/2013 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Manion, Francis) (Entered: 03/04/2013)
12 SUMMONS Returned Executed by William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC as to Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs. served on 2/25/2013, answer due 4/26/2013; United States Department of Health and Human Services served on 2/25/2013, answer due 4/26/2013 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Manion, Francis) (Entered: 03/04/2013)

Case: 1:13-cv-1210 As of: 11/05/2017 11:00 PM CST 4 of 6

03/05/2013 03/05/2013
03/05/2013 03/05/2013 03/07/2013
03/08/2013 03/20/2013
03/20/2013 03/20/2013 04/19/2013 07/06/2013 10/07/2013
10/17/2013

13 MINUTE entry before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Notice of motion set for 3/12/13 is stricken. Motion by Plaintiffs William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC for preliminary injunction 8 is being referred to Magistrate Judge Finnegan. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 03/05/2013)
14 RESPONSE by Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to MOTION by Plaintiffs William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC for preliminary injunction 8 (Notice of Non−Opposition) (Berwick, Benjamin) (Entered: 03/05/2013)
15 MOTION by Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to stay district court proceedings (unopposed) (Berwick, Benjamin) (Entered: 03/05/2013)
16 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ORDER:Case referred to the Honorable Sheila M. Finnegan pursuant to Local Rule 72.1. Signed by Honorable Sheila M. Finnegan on 3/5/2013.(nf, ) (Entered: 03/07/2013)
18 MINUTE entry before Honorable Sheila Finnegan: In light of defendants' non−opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction 8 , the referral to this Court for a hearing on that motion is closed and the case is returned to the district judge for further proceedings, including a ruling on defendants' motion for a stay 15 . Honorable Sheila Finnegan no longer referred to the case. Mailed notice. (is, ) (Entered: 03/07/2013)
19 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin by Benjamin Leon Berwick (Berwick, Benjamin) (Entered: 03/08/2013)
20 MINUTE entry before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: By agreement of the parties, the Court grants plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 8 , enters agreed preliminary injunction and grants defendants' motion to stay these proceedings 15 pending the Seventh Circuit's resolution of the consolidated appeals in Korte v. Sebelius, No. 12−3841 and Grote v. Sebelius, No. 13−077. The parties are ordered to notify the Court of the Seventh Circuit's decision within seven days after it is issued. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 03/20/2013)
21 AGREED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION signed by the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 3/20/2013. Mailed notice(cjg, ) (Entered: 03/20/2013)
22 MINUTE entry before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Status hearing set for 4/19/13 is stricken. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 03/20/2013)
23 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin by Michelle Renee Bennett (Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 04/19/2013)
24 NOTICE by Edward Lawrence White of Change of Address (White, Edward) (Entered: 07/06/2013)
25 GENERAL ORDER 13−0018 dated 10/7/13: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, effective October 1, 2013, that all civil litigation involving as a party the United States of America, is immediately suspended, postponed and held in abeyance continuing for a period of fourteen (14) days from the date of entry of this General Order (For Further Details See Attached Order). "Signed by Chief Judge Castillo." Mailed notice(vcf, ) (Entered: 10/07/2013)
26 GENERAL ORDER 13−0019 dated 10/17/13: IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, that the stay entered by General Order 13−0018 is hereby lifted, and any and all deadlines in the affected civil litigation (whether established by order, rule, or agreement), including but not limited to any scheduled discovery and pleading dates, are extended

Case: 1:13-cv-1210 As of: 11/05/2017 11:00 PM CST 5 of 6

01/10/2014 01/10/2014 01/10/2014 07/09/2014 07/24/2014 07/24/2014 07/28/2014
09/05/2014 09/05/2014 09/08/2014
09/23/2014 09/23/2014

by 28 days. The Court warns litigants that this General Order does not purport to affect rights to or deadlines concerning appeal from any decision of this Court. Any litigant affected by this General Order may see relief from the order by motion. Trial dates in the affected cases will stand, although they may need to be adjusted in individual cases to account for the extension of other dates. The Court may, in any particular case, vary the effect or operation of this General Order by a separate ruling. (For Further Details See Attached Order). "Signed by Chief Judge Castillo."Mailed notice(vcf, ) (Entered: 10/18/2013)
27 MOTION by Plaintiffs William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC to stay proceedings and extend preliminary injunction (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Notice of Issuance of Mandate)(Manion, Francis) (Entered: 01/10/2014)
28 NOTICE of Motion by Francis J Manion for presentment of motion to stay 27 before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 1/21/2014 at 09:30 AM. (Manion, Francis) (Entered: 01/10/2014)
29 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Notice of motion hearing set for 1/21/2014 is stricken. Unopposed motion by Plaintiffs William C Lindsay, Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel, LLC to stay proceedings and extend preliminary injunction 27 is granted. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 01/10/2014)
30 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Status hearing set for 7/30/2014 at 09:30 AM.Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 07/09/2014)
31 MOTION by Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to reset status hearing (Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 07/24/2014)
32 NOTICE of Motion by Michelle Renee Bennett for presentment of motion to reset, 31 before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 7/29/2014 at 09:30 AM. (Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 07/24/2014)
33 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Notice of motion hearing set for 7/29/2014 is stricken. Unopposed motion by Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to reset status hearing 31 is granted. Status hearing set for 7/30/2014 is stricken and reset to 9/11/2014 at 09:30 AM. Preliminary injunction is extended to 9/13/2014. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 07/28/2014)
34 MOTION by Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to reset status hearing (Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 09/05/2014)
35 NOTICE of Motion by Michelle Renee Bennett for presentment of motion to reset, 34 before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 9/11/2014 at 09:30 AM. (Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 09/05/2014)
36 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Notice of motion hearing set for 9/11/2014 is stricken and no appearance is necessary. Motion by Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to reset status hearing 34 is granted. Status hearing set for 9/11/2014 is stricken and reset to 9/29/2014 at 09:30 AM. Upon parties agreement, the preliminary injunction is extended until October 13, 2014. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 09/08/2014)
37 MOTION by Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to vacate September 29, 2014 Status Hearing (Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 09/23/2014)
38 NOTICE of Motion by Michelle Renee Bennett for presentment of motion to vacate, 37 before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 9/30/2014 at 09:30 AM. (Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 09/23/2014)

Case: 1:13-cv-1210 As of: 11/05/2017 11:00 PM CST 6 of 6

09/24/2014
09/25/2014 09/26/2014 10/15/2014 10/15/2014 10/20/2014
10/20/2014 10/29/2014 11/13/2014
12/02/2014 12/02/2014 12/03/2014

39 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Notice of motion set for 9/30/2014 is stricken. Motion by Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to vacate September 29, 2014 Status Hearing 37 is granted. Status hearing set for 9/29/2014 is stricken. It is hereby ordered that the parties, by October 20, 2014, submit either a joint proposed injunction and judgment, or a joint proposal for resolving any remaining dispute about the scope of the injunction and judgment to be entered. It is further ordered that the preliminary injunction that is currently in effect is extended until such time as the Court enters final judgment in this matter. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 09/24/2014)
40 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Status hearing set for 9/29/2014 is stricken and reset to 10/8/2014 at 09:30 AM. on Court's own motion. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 09/25/2014)
41 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Status hearing set for 10/8/2014 is stricken on Court's own motion. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 09/26/2014)
42 MOTION by Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to approve consent judgment (Joint Motion for Entry of Injunction and Judgment) (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 10/15/2014)
43 NOTICE of Motion by Michelle Renee Bennett for presentment of motion to approve consent judgment, 42 before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 10/21/2014 at 09:30 AM. (Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 10/15/2014)
44 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Notice of motion hearing as to motion by Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to approve consent judgment 42 set for 10/21/2014 is stricken on request of Defendants and will be re−noticed.Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 10/20/2014)
45 NOTICE of Motion by Michelle Renee Bennett for presentment of motion to approve consent judgment, 42 before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 11/4/2014 at 09:30 AM. (Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 10/20/2014)
46 NOTICE of Motion by Michelle Renee Bennett for presentment of motion to approve consent judgment, 42 before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 11/13/2014 at 09:30 AM. (Bennett, Michelle) (Entered: 10/29/2014)
47 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Motion hearing held on 11/13/2014. Motion by Defendants Seth Harris, Kathleen Sebelius, Sec of US Dept of Health & Human Servs., United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Labor, United States Department of the Treasury, Neal Wolin to approve consent judgment 42 is granted. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 11/14/2014)
48 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: The Court orders the parties to appear for an initial status hearing. All parties shall refer to and comply with Judge Guzman's requirements for the initial appearance as outlined in Judge Guzman's case management procedures, which can be found at: www.ilnd.uscourts.gov. Status hearing set for 2/2/2015 at 09:30 AM. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 12/02/2014)
49 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Minute entry dated 2/2/2014 48 is stricken as entered in error on the wrong docket. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 12/02/2014)
50 INJUNCTION AND JUDGMENT signed by the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 12/3/2014. Mailed notice(cjg, ) (Entered: 12/03/2014)