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.

3:14-CV-01064-BR

 

OPINION AND ORDER 

SUSAN HUITT

16617 S.E. Naegeli Drive

Portland, OR 97236

(503) 465-6639 

Plaintiff, Pro Se

SARAH J. RYAN

APRIL L. UPCHURCH FREDRICKSON

Jackson Lewis PC

1001 S.W. Fifth Avenue

Suite 1205

Portland, OR 97204

(503) 345-4162 

Attorneys for Defendants

1 - OPINION AND ORDER

Case 3:14-cv-01064-BR Document 116 Filed 12/05/16 Page 1 of 4
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

Case 3:14-cv-01064-BR Document 116 Filed 12/05/16 Page 2 of 4
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

Case 3:14-cv-01064-BR Document 116 Filed 12/05/16 Page 3 of 4
(#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

Case 3:14-cv-01064-BR Document 116 Filed 12/05/16 Page 4 of 4