Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-00983/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-00983-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 

---

1

19-CV-983 JLS (JLB)

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHARP HEALTH PLAN, a California 

nonprofit public benefit corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

HEALTHEDGE SOFTWARE, INC., a 

Delaware corporation; DOES 1 through 

10, inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No.: 19-CV-983 JLS (JLB)

ORDER RE: MARCH 25, 2020 JOINT 

STATUS REPORT AND ORDERING 

ADDITIONAL BRIEFING

(ECF No. 17)

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Sharp Health Plan and Defendant HealthEdge 

Software, Inc.’s Joint Status Report (“Joint Rep.,” ECF No. 17), filed pursuant to the 

Court’s June 24, 2019 Order Staying Action Pursuant to the First-to-File Rule, ECF No. 

16. The Parties report that the Honorable Allison D. Burroughs of the United States District 

Court for the District of Massachusetts denied Sharp’s motion to dismiss on jurisdictional 

grounds in the first-filed action, HealthEdge Software, Inc. v. Sharp Health Plan, No. 1:19-

cv-11020-ADB (D. Mass. filed Apr. 30, 2019) (the “Massachusetts Action”). See Joint 

Rep. at 2. Consequently, HealthEdge requests that this action be dismissed pursuant to the 

first-to-file rule, see id., while Sharp requests that this action be stayed or transferred to 

avoid any issues concerning the timeliness of its claims. See id. at 2–3.

Case 3:19-cv-00983-JLS-JLB Document 18 Filed 03/30/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

19-CV-983 JLS (JLB)

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

The Court has already determined that the first-to-file rule applies. See ECF No. 16 

at 6. Given Judge Burroughs’ rejection of Sharp’s jurisdictional challenges to the 

Massachusetts Action, the Court therefore has discretion to stay, transfer, or dismiss this 

action. In re Bozic, 888 F.3d 1048, 1051–52 (9th Cir. 2018). Given Sharp’s concerns 

regarding the statute of limitations, see Joint Rep. at 2–3, the Court is disinclined to dismiss 

this action, see Alltrade, Inc. v. Uniweld Prod., Inc., 946 F.2d 622, 625 (9th Cir. 1991), and 

“[a] court may transfer an action under the first-to-file rule or 28 U.S.C. § 1404 either sua 

sponte, or upon motion of a party.” Lawyers Funding Grp., LLC v. Harris, No. CV 15-

04059 MMM (EX), 2015 WL 13298145, at *12 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2015). Nonetheless, 

the Court concludes that additional briefing is merited.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Sharp to file a supplemental brief, not to exceed 

ten (10) pages, addressing its preference for a stay or transfer to the District of 

Massachusetts and the legal arguments supporting its preference on or before April 13, 

2020. HealthEdge MAY FILE a response, not to exceed ten (10) pages, on or before 

April 20, 2020. Absent further Order of the Court, no replies shall be filed, and no oral 

argument held.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 30, 2020

Case 3:19-cv-00983-JLS-JLB Document 18 Filed 03/30/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2