Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03305/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03305-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4818-2301-3958.1 1

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO STAY LITIGATION

LEWIS 

BRISBOIS 

BISGAARD 

& SMITH LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

GREG L. JOHNSON, SB# 132397

 E-Mail: Greg.Johnson@lewisbrisbois.com

TIMOTHY J. NALLY, SB# 288728

 E-Mail: Timothy.Nally@lewisbrisbois.com

2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 700

Sacramento, California 95833

Telephone: 916.564.5400

Facsimile: 916.564.5444

Attorneys for Defendant,

UNITED HEALTHCARE INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

DAVID BAIN, DAYNA BAIN and ALAINA 

BAIN, individuals, ,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

OXFORD HEALTH INSURANCE, INC. and 

UNITED BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, in their 

capacities as insurers, administrators, and 

fiduciaries of the Sagent Advisors Inc. Group 

Health Plan, an ERISA-regulated welfare plan,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 3:15-cv-03305-EMC

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

TO WITHDRAW DEFENDANT’S 

OPPOSITION (DKT. 71) TO 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STAY (DKT. 

68) AND TO STAY THE LITIGATION

Trial Date: None Set

Plaintiffs David Bain, Dayna Bain, and Alaina Bain (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) and 

Defendants Oxford Health Insurance, Inc. and United Behavioral Health (collectively, 

“Defendants”) do hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

RECITALS

WHEREAS, on April 4, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Stay Action and Alternative 

Motion to Continue Summary Judgment Schedule (“the Motion for Stay”), which is presently 

scheduled to be heard on April 13, 2017 (see Dkt. 68);

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs’ Motion requests, inter alia, that this Court stay the above-captioned 

Case 3:15-cv-03305-EMC Document 76 Filed 04/13/17 Page 1 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4818-2301-3958.1 2 3:15-cv-03305-EMC

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO STAY LITIGATION

LEWIS 

BRISBOIS 

BISGAARD 

& SMITH LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

litigation until November 16, 2017, in light of the pending matters of Wit v. United Behavioral 

Health, N.D. Cal. Case No. 14-cv-02346-JCS, and Alexander v. United Behavioral Health, N.D. 

Cal. Case No. 14-cv-05337-JCS (collectively, “Wit”);

WHEREAS, Defendants filed an opposition on April 7, 2017 (see Dkt. 71), and Plaintiffs 

filed a reply on April 10, 2017 (see Dkt. 73);

WHEREAS, Defendants contend that if a judgment is entered with respect to the class 

currently certified in Wit, such judgment will preclude all of the claims currently asserted by 

Plaintiffs in the above-captioned action in their entirety, subject to any opt-out rights;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs dispute Defendants’ contention for multiple reasons, including, but 

not limited to, the fact that the instant lawsuit includes multiple claims not raised or contemplated 

to be adjudicated in Wit, and that will not be resolved by Wit, including but not limited to claims 

concerning the adequacy and propriety of Defendant’s termination of benefits Plaintiff Alaina 

Bain’s residential treatment under ERISA and the ERISA claims regulation, claims for monetary 

benefits, claims for penalties under ERISA § 502(c), and otherwise (whereas, by contrast, Wit is 

expressly seeking only re-adjudication – not monetary benefits – of claims denied based on an 

allegedly improper Level of Care Guideline); and neither a judgment nor a settlement in a class 

action such as Wit resolves or produce a waiver or release of claims outside the scope of those 

actually litigated. See National Super Spuds v. N.Y Mercantile Exchange, 660 F.2d 9, 18 (2d Cir. 

1981); and

WHEREAS, despite their differing positions on these issues, all parties believe that the 

requested stay is appropriate; 

STIPULATION

THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, Defendants hereby withdraw 

their opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Stay, and Plaintiffs and Defendants hereby stipulate and 

agree that the above-captioned litigation should be stayed until November 16, 2017, as requested 

in Plaintiffs’ Motion for Stay.

The undersigned, on behalf of their respective clients, do so stipulate.

Case 3:15-cv-03305-EMC Document 76 Filed 04/13/17 Page 2 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4818-2301-3958.1 3 3:15-cv-03305-EMC

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO STAY LITIGATION

LEWIS 

BRISBOIS 

BISGAARD 

& SMITH LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

Respectfully submitted.

DATED: April 11, 2017 LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

By: /s/ Greg L. Johnson

Greg L. Johnson

Timothy J. Nally

Attorneys for Defendants OXFORD HEALTH 

INSURANCE, INC. AND UNITED 

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH

DATED: April 11, 2017 PHILIPS, ERLEWINE, GIVEN & CARLIN LLP

CREITZ & SEREBIN LLP

By: /s/ Joseph Creitz

Joseph Creitz

Co-Counsel for Plaintiffs DAVID BAIN, DAYNA 

BAIN and ALAINA BAIN

Case 3:15-cv-03305-EMC Document 76 Filed 04/13/17 Page 3 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4818-2301-3958.1 4 3:15-cv-03305-EMC

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO STAY LITIGATION

LEWIS 

BRISBOIS 

BISGAARD 

& SMITH LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

ATTESTATION

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I attest that concurrence in the filing of this 

document has been obtained from each of the other signatories.

Dated: April 11, 2017 /s/ Greg L. Johnson

Greg L. Johnson

Attorneys for Defendants

Case 3:15-cv-03305-EMC Document 76 Filed 04/13/17 Page 4 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4818-2301-3958.1 5 3:15-cv-03305-EMC

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO STAY LITIGATION

LEWIS 

BRISBOIS 

BISGAARD 

& SMITH LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

ORDER UPON STIPULATION

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing, the Court hereby stays 

the above-captioned litigation until November 16, 2017, as requested in the Motion to Stay (Dkt. 

68).

It is so ORDERD.

DATED: 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

The 4/13/17 hearing is vacated. Further CMC is 

reset from 5/25/17 to 11/30/17 at 10:30 a.m. An updated 

joint CMC statement shall be filed by 11/22/17. 4/13/2017

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

AS MODIFIED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:15-cv-03305-EMC Document 76 Filed 04/13/17 Page 5 of 5