Hale v. Teladoc Health, Inc.
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-05245
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Hale v. Teladoc Health, Inc., Judge Briccetti ordered plaintiffs to choose whether to amend their complaint or proceed against Teladoc’s pending dismissal motion.
The order directly affected plaintiffs April Hale and Len Cline and defendant Teladoc Health, Inc. by setting deadlines and procedures for responding to the pending motion to dismiss.
What happened
Hale v. Teladoc Health, Inc. concerns a motion by Teladoc Health, Inc. to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint. The court did not decide that motion.
Judge Briccetti ordered the plaintiffs to notify the court by August 31, 2020, whether they would file an amended complaint or rely on their existing complaint. If they chose to amend, they had 14 days after notifying the court to file the amended complaint.
Judge Briccetti’s order also gave Teladoc 21 days after any amendment to answer, file a new dismissal motion, or state that it would rely on its original motion. The order was a case-management directive, not a ruling granting or denying the dismissal motion.
The detailed version
- Hale v. Teladoc Health, Inc. · No. 7:20-cv-05245
- Vincent Briccetti
- Aug. 21, 2020
Background
Teladoc Health, Inc. filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which asks the court to dismiss a complaint for failing to state a legally sufficient claim. The motion challenged the complaint filed by April Hale and Len Cline, individually and on behalf of others described as similarly situated.
Order
The court ordered the plaintiffs to notify it by August 31, 2020, whether they intended to file an amended complaint in response to the motion or would rely on the complaint already subject to the motion.
If the plaintiffs chose not to amend, the motion would proceed under the ordinary schedule, and the court stated it was unlikely to give them another opportunity to amend to address deficiencies revealed by the fully briefed arguments. The court stated that the deadlines for opposition and reply papers would be governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the court’s local rules unless the court ordered otherwise.
If the plaintiffs chose to amend, they had to file the amended complaint no later than 14 days after notifying the court. Within 21 days after the amendment, Teladoc could answer the amended complaint, file a motion to dismiss it, or notify the court that it would rely on its initially filed motion.
Disposition and Effect
The court did not grant or deny Teladoc’s motion to dismiss. It directed the plaintiffs to choose between amending their complaint and proceeding on the existing complaint, and set the steps that would follow either choice. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti issued the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.