Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 3, 2025

Epilepsy and Neurophysiology Management Services v. Anthem Blue Cross Blue…

Full caption

Epilepsy and Neurophysiology Management Services v. Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield f/k/a Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield

Judge
Clarke
Docket
7:25-cv-06526
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
ArbitrationCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Epilepsy and Neurophysiology v. Anthem: Judge Clarke set deadlines for briefing on a petition to confirm an arbitration award.

Who this affects

Epilepsy and Neurophysiology Management Services and Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield f/k/a Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield; the order set their deadlines for filings concerning the petition to confirm an arbitration award.

What happened

In Epilepsy and Neurophysiology Management Services v. Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield, the plaintiff filed a petition asking the court to confirm an arbitration award.

The court said proceedings to confirm an arbitration award are handled much like a request for summary judgment and set dates for the parties’ filings.

Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke ordered the plaintiff’s additional materials by October 10, 2025, the defendant’s opposition by October 31, and the plaintiff’s reply by November 14; the order did not decide whether to confirm the award.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Epilepsy and Neurophysiology Management Services v. Anthem Blue Cross Blue… · No. 7:25-cv-06526
Judge
Clarke
Date
Sept. 3, 2025

Background

On August 7, 2025, Epilepsy and Neurophysiology Management Services filed a petition to confirm an arbitration award against Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield f/k/a Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield.

Scheduling Order

The court explained that proceedings to confirm an arbitration award are treated much like a motion for summary judgment, which is a request for a decision based on the submitted materials when there is no need for a trial on disputed facts. The court ordered the plaintiff to file any additional supporting materials, such as a legal memorandum, by October 10, 2025. Anthem’s opposition, if any, was due October 31, 2025, and the plaintiff’s reply, if any, was due November 14, 2025.

If Anthem had not appeared by October 10, 2025, the plaintiff was ordered to serve the complaint, supporting papers, and the scheduling order electronically and by overnight mail by October 15, 2025. The plaintiff also had to file proof of that service by October 16, 2025.

Disposition

Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke entered a scheduling order. The opinion did not decide whether the arbitration award should be confirmed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.