§Why CasetextPricing

Ijkg, Llc et al v. United Healthcare Services, Inc. et al

BRIEF in Opposition

57 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 254,855 times   279 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 268,629 times   366 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  3. Warth v. Seldin

    422 U.S. 490 (1975)   Cited 11,925 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"

  4. Phillips v. County of Allegheny

    515 F.3d 224 (3d Cir. 2008)   Cited 16,924 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a district court need not permit a curative amendment if such amendment would be futile

  5. Varity Corp. v. Howe

    516 U.S. 489 (1996)   Cited 2,388 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Holding that ERISA fiduciaries may have duties to disclose information about plan prospects that they have no duty, or even power, to change

  6. Gould Elecs. Inc. v. U.S.

    220 F.3d 169 (3d Cir. 2000)   Cited 2,642 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the phrase "law of the place" in the sixth prong of § 1346(b) is jurisdictional

  7. Bell v. Hood

    327 U.S. 678 (1946)   Cited 4,327 times
    Holding that an asserted federal claim triggers federal question jurisdiction unless the claim "clearly appears to be immaterial and made solely for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction or where such a claim is wholly insubstantial and frivolous"

  8. Lincoln Benefit Life Co. v. AEI Life, LLC

    800 F.3d 99 (3d Cir. 2015)   Cited 925 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the citizenship of an LLC is determined by the citizenship of each of its members

  9. Kentucky Assn. of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller

    538 U.S. 329 (2003)   Cited 370 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that two Kentucky any-willing-provider laws are saved from preemption because they regulate insurance within the meaning of ERISA's savings clause

  10. Kehr Packages, Inc. v. Fidelcor, Inc.

    926 F.2d 1406 (3d Cir. 1991)   Cited 1,990 times
    Holding that the RlCO-continuity analysis of an allegedly fraudulent scheme must focus on "the instances of deceit constituting the underlying fraudulent scheme"

  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 348,148 times   927 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 157,408 times   196 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  13. Section 1132 - Civil enforcement

    29 U.S.C. § 1132   Cited 26,353 times   171 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable "[a]ny administrator" who fails to provide documents in a timely manner

  14. Section 1001 - Congressional findings and declaration of policy

    29 U.S.C. § 1001   Cited 20,557 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Noting that ERISA was enacted “to protect ... employee benefit plans and their beneficiaries”

  15. Section 1144 - Other laws

    29 U.S.C. § 1144   Cited 6,995 times   52 Legal Analyses
    Saving clause

  16. Section 1104 - Fiduciary duties

    29 U.S.C. § 1104   Cited 4,843 times   72 Legal Analyses
    Specifying duties of a "fiduciary . . . with respect to a plan"

  17. Section 1133 - Claims procedure

    29 U.S.C. § 1133   Cited 2,337 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Detailing similar requirements

  18. Section 26:2S-6.1 - Managed care plan to pay full contractual rate to out-of-network provider, direct payments, certain circumstances

    N.J. Stat. § 26:2S-6.1   Cited 5 times

    a. With respect to a carrier which offers a managed care plan that provides for both in-network and out-of-network benefits, in the event that: (1) a covered person is admitted by an out-of-network health care provider to an in-network health care facility for covered, medically necessary health care services; or (2) the covered person receives covered, medically necessary health care services from an out-of-network health care provider while the covered person is a patient at an in-network health

  19. Section 17:48E-10.2 - Payment of out-of-network dental benefits by health service corporation

    N.J. Stat. § 17:48E-10.2   Cited 3 times

    a. (1) Except as provided in subsection e. of this section, a health service corporation that makes a dental benefit payment to a covered person for services rendered by an out-of-network dentist shall issue the payment to the covered person in accordance with the time frames set forth in section 4 of P.L. 1999, c. 154(C.17:48E-10.1), and shall, within three days of issuing the payment, provide a notification to the out-of-network dentist of the amount and date of the payment and the services for

  20. Section 2560.503-1 - Claims procedure

    29 C.F.R. § 2560.503-1   Cited 2,830 times   77 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the requirements of 29 C.F.R. § 2560.503-1