Source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/85977209/CV-Complaint-Obrien-v-Hhs-Obama-Abortion-Pill-Mandate
Timestamp: 2015-07-31 12:38:35
Document Index: 703435460

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 147', '§ 1331', '§ 1361', '§ 2201', '§ 2202', '§ 2000', '§1391']

P. 1CV Complaint Obrien v Hhs Obama Abortion Pill MandateCV Complaint Obrien v Hhs Obama Abortion Pill MandateRatings: (0)|Views: 12|Likes: 0Published by Joshua MercerMore info:Categories:Types, Business/Law, Court FilingsPublished by: Joshua Mercer on Mar 19, 2012Copyright:Attribution Non-commercialAvailability:Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate content|Add to collectionSee moreSee lesshttps://www.scribd.com/doc/85977209/CV-Complaint-Obrien-v-Hhs-Obama-Abortion-Pill-Mandate03/19/2012pdftextoriginal 1UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURIEASTERN DIVISIONFRANK R. O’BRIEN JR., )O’BRIEN INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS, LLC, ))PLAINTIFFS, ) CASE NO. ______________ )vs. )
))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; TIMOTHY F. GEITHNER, )in his official capacity as the Secretary of the )United States Department of the Treasury; )UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; )and HILDA L. SOLIS, in her official capacity as )Secretary of the United States Department of Labor, ))DEFENDANTS. ) _________________________________________ )Plaintiffs, Frank R. O’Brien Jr. and O’Brien Industrial Holdings, LLC, through their attorneys, say: NATURE OF ACTION1.
In this case, Plaintiffs seek judicial review of Defendants’ violations of constitutionaland statutory provisions in connection with the Defendants’ promulgation and implementation of certain regulations adopted under the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
2(“PPACA”), specifically those regulations mandating that employers include in employee health benefit plans coverage of services that violate an employer’s religious and moral values.2.
Specifically, Plaintiffs ask the court for declaratory and injunctive relief from theoperation of the Final Rule confirmed and promulgated by the Defendants on February 15, 2012,mandating that group health plans include coverage, without cost sharing, for “all Food and DrugAdministration-approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures and patient educationand counseling for all women with reproductive capacity” in plan years beginning on or after August 1, 2012 (hereafter, “the Mandate” or “the Final Rule”) see 45 CFR § 147.130 (a)(1)(iv),as confirmed at 77 Fed. Register 8725 (Feb. 15, 2012), adopting and quoting Health Resourcesand Services Administration (HRSA) Guidelines found at http://www.hrsa.gov/womensguidelines.3.
Plaintiff, Frank R. O’Brien Jr., is an adherent of the Catholic religion. As theindividual with the controlling interest in Plaintiff, O’Brien Industrial Holdings, LLC (“OIH”)and its subsidiaries, O’Brien wishes to conduct his business in a manner that does not violate the principle of his religious faith.4.
O’Brien has concluded that complying with the Mandate would require him toviolate his religious beliefs because it would require him and/or the corporations he controls to pay for, not only contraception and sterilization, but also abortion, because certain drugs anddevices such as the “morning-after pill,” “Plan B,” and “Ella” come within the Mandate’s andHRSA’s definition of “Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptive methods” despitetheir known abortifacient mechanisms of action.5.
O’Brien contends that by requiring him to choose between conducting his business ina manner consistent with his religion, or paying ruinous fines and penalties, the Mandate violates
3his rights under the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and violates theAdministrative Procedure Act.JURISDICTION AND VENUE6.
This court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and § 1361.This action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States. This Court has jurisdiction to render declaratory and injunctive relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 and § 2202 and 42U.S.C. § 2000bb-1.7.
Venue is appropriate in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(e)(3) as thePlaintiffs reside within this district.IDENTIFICATION OF PARTIES8.
Plaintiff, Frank R. O’Brien Jr., is an individual and a citizen of the State of Missouriand the United States.9.
O’Brien holds the sole voting interest in Plaintiff, O’Brien Industrial Holdings, LLC,a Missouri limited liability company. Plaintiff, OIH, is the holding company for and owner of the Christy family of companies: Christy Catalytics, LLC, Christy Industrial Services Co., LLC,Christy Minerals Company, LLC, and the Christy Refractories Company, L.L.C. and O’BrienAsset Management, LLC.10.
Frank R. O’Brien Jr. is the Chairman and Managing Member of OIH. He isresponsible for setting all policies governing the conduct of all phases of the business of OIH andthe Christy family of companies.11.
Defendant United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), is an
More From This UserCatholicVote-AUTOCAM Cert Petition FinalJoshua MercerOH & MI Attorneys General Amicus BriefJoshua MercerCatholicVote Compares Obama and Romney color flyerJoshua MercerCatholicVote Compares Obama and Romney B&W flyerJoshua MercerIn Defense of Liberty GtownJoshua MercerCHA Letter-Support HR 5111Joshua Mercer