XIFIN, INC. v. The Mount Sinai Hospital
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:20-cv-02130
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In XIFIN v. Mount Sinai, Judge Ramos ordered XIFIN to respond to Mount Sinai’s discovery-stay request; he did not decide the request.
XIFIN, Inc. and The Mount Sinai Hospital; the order required XIFIN to respond to Mount Sinai’s request to pause discovery.
What happened
XIFIN, Inc. v. The Mount Sinai Hospital concerns a request by Mount Sinai to pause discovery while its motion to dismiss is pending. The request was made in a letter to the court.
Mount Sinai argued that the motion to dismiss had substantial merit and that the requested discovery would be broad and burdensome, including records involving a prior contract and a settled dispute with Blue Cross and Blue Shield. Mount Sinai also argued that delaying discovery would cause XIFIN little prejudice.
On October 5, 2020, Judge Edgardo Ramos directed XIFIN to respond to Mount Sinai’s letter in no more than three pages by October 7, 2020. The order did not rule on whether discovery would be stayed.
The detailed version
- XIFIN, INC. v. The Mount Sinai Hospital · No. 1:20-cv-02130
- Edgardo Ramos
- Oct. 5, 2020
Background
The Mount Sinai Hospital asked the court to stay, or pause, discovery while its motion to dismiss XIFIN, Inc.’s complaint was under consideration. The request was based on Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16(b) and 26(c), as well as the judge’s local rules.
Mount Sinai’s position
Mount Sinai argued that its motion to dismiss had substantial merit. According to its letter, XIFIN’s claims relied on provisions in a February 17, 2009 Laboratory Billing Agreement that later amendments allegedly abolished or limited. Mount Sinai specifically disputed XIFIN’s claimed right to inspect certain books and records and its claimed right to a percentage of amounts recovered in a December 26, 2018 settlement with Blue Cross and Blue Shield.
Mount Sinai also argued that discovery would be unusually broad and burdensome because XIFIN sought records dating back to 2009 and information concerning the settled dispute with Blue Cross and Blue Shield. Mount Sinai said the discovery would burden both it and a non-party. It further argued that XIFIN would face little prejudice from a temporary stay while the court considered the motion to dismiss.
Court’s action
Judge Edgardo Ramos did not decide the motion to stay discovery or the pending motion to dismiss. Instead, the court directed XIFIN to respond to Mount Sinai’s October 5 letter in a letter of no more than three pages by October 7, 2020.
Disposition
The opinion text shows an order directing a response. It does not show that the court granted or denied the requested discovery stay.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.