Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 2, 2021

UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Docket
7:20-cv-10664
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Judge Briccetti ordered plaintiffs to choose whether to amend their complaint or proceed on it.

Who this affects

UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company, United Healthcare Services, Inc., and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

What happened

In UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company and United Healthcare Services, Inc. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Regeneron moved to dismiss the complaint on March 1, 2021.

The court ordered the plaintiffs to notify it by March 11 whether they would file an amended complaint or rely on their existing complaint. If they amended, they had to file the amendment within 14 days after notifying the court.

Judge Vincent L. Briccetti did not decide the motion to dismiss in this order. After an amendment, Regeneron could answer, file a new motion to dismiss, or rely on its original motion within the deadlines stated by the court.

The detailed version

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

Case
UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · No. 7:20-cv-10664
Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Date
Mar. 2, 2021

Background

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. moved to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint on March 1, 2021. The order does not describe the claims or the arguments in that motion.

Order

The court ordered UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company and United Healthcare Services, Inc. to notify the court by March 11, 2021, whether they intended to file an amended complaint in response to the motion or would rely on the complaint already filed.

If the plaintiffs chose not to amend, the motion to dismiss would proceed under the ordinary schedule. The court stated that it was unlikely to give the plaintiffs another opportunity to amend to address deficiencies made apparent by the fully briefed motion.

If the plaintiffs chose to amend, they had to file the amended complaint within 14 days after notifying the court. Within 21 days after the amendment, Regeneron could file an answer, file a motion to dismiss the amended complaint, or notify the court that it was relying on its initial motion to dismiss. The deadlines for opposition and reply papers would be governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the local civil rules unless the court ordered otherwise.

Disposition

Judge Vincent L. Briccetti’s order did not grant or deny Regeneron’s motion to dismiss. It set out the plaintiffs’ options concerning amendment of the complaint and the procedures that would follow each option.

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.