Overview of the Lawsuits Challenging the Affordable Care … · · 2015-10-16Overview of the Lawsuits Challenging the Affordable Care Act’s No Cost-Sharing Contraceptive Coverage

Overview of the Lawsuits Challenging the Affordable Care Act’s No Cost-Sharing Contraceptive Coverage Benefit

77 lawsuits have been filed in federal court challenging the Affordable Care Act’s no cost-sharing contraceptive coverage benefit. 23 cases are closed; 54 cases are currently pending. For-profit companies are among those who are pushing for the courts to allow bosses to make women’s reproductive health decisions. Cases brought by non-profits:

34 cases have been brought by non-profit organizations. Six (6) cases were withdrawn by the plaintiffs and 15 cases were dismissed and those decisions were not appealed, so 13 of the non-profit cases are pending.

For the most part, courts have dismissed the non-profit cases as not being ripe or because plaintiffs lack standing. This is because non-profits with religious objections to providing contraceptive coverage were given a delay in implementing the benefit and the Administration was undertaking rulemaking on an “accommodation” for non-profit organizations with religious objections to providing the benefit. The Administration finalized its rule on June 28 – so far, 10 non-profit organizations have said that they are not satisfied with the accommodation and intend to proceed with their lawsuits or have re-filed lawsuits that had been dismissed. Two cases were dismissed by the district courts as moot.

Cases brought by for-profits:

41 of the cases have been filed by for-profit companies, ranging from a mining company to a crafts store chain to an HVAC company. One case was even brought by a business owner who currently has no employees. Two – Geneva College and Weingartz – also include non-profit plaintiffs. One company withdrew its initial case, but later filed another case in a different circuit so 40 for-profit cases are pending.

The cases brought by for-profits are moving quickly because these companies were not eligible for the delay, and, for the most part, are already required to provide the contraceptive coverage benefit. The courts are addressing these, and reaching different outcomes.

o One court has reached the merits – a district court granted the government’s motion to dismiss in one case, O’Brien, which is now on appeal to the 8th Circuit. The district court recognized that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (the federal law the companies are relying upon to challenge the benefit) “is not a means to force one’s religious practices upon others.” The 8th Circuit has issued a stay pending appeal.

o In 7 cases, courts have denied for-profit companies’ request for temporary relief, meaning those companies must provide the benefit.

National Women’s Law Center- September 2013, Page 2

o 27 companies so far have some form of temporary relief, which means the companies do not have to provide the benefit while they pursue their claims in court. (In some of those cases, the district court denied relief, but the appellate court issued temporary relief as an appeal moves forward. In others, district courts granted relief that was unopposed by the government, because they are awaiting a ruling by the appeals court in a separate for-profit case).

o No court of appeals has reached the merits.

Two courts of appeals have refused to delay enforcement of the benefit.

Conestoga (3rd Circuit Court of Appeals)

Autocam; Eden Foods (6th Circuit Court of Appeals) Three courts of appeals have given temporary relief.

Gilardi (D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals)

Korte; Grote (7th Circuit Court of Appeals)

O’Brien; Annex Medical (8th Circuit Court of Appeals) One court of appeals reversed a lower court’s denial of injunctive relief

and sent the case back to the district court, which granted a preliminary injunction.

Hobby Lobby (10th Circuit Court of Appeals)

Cases brought by others:

2 cases have been brought by plaintiffs that are neither for-profit companies nor non-profit organizations.

o Wieland was brought by Missouri State Representative Paul Wieland, a member of the Missouri House of Representatives. This is the first challenge to the contraceptive coverage benefit by an employee who receives insurance coverage through an employer that is complying with the requirement.

o State of Nebraska was brought by officials representing the states of Nebraska, South Carolina, Michigan, Texas, Florida, Ohio, and Oklahoma. Following the government’s issuance of the final contraceptive coverage rule, the plaintiffs asked the 8th Circuit to dismiss their case, which the court did.

Possible Supreme Court review

2 for-profit cases could potentially reach the U.S. Supreme Court this term. o The federal government will decide by September 25 whether to seek Supreme

Court review of the 10th Circuit’s en banc decision in Hobby Lobby. o The plaintiffs in Conestoga said they intend to seek Supreme Court review of the

3rd Circuit’s decision to deny a preliminary injunction. They should have until November 12 to do so.

1 non-profit has asked for Supreme Court review. Liberty University asked the Supreme Court to hear its challenge to the individual and employer responsibility provisions of the health care law, which it claims include the contraceptive coverage benefit.


For-Profit Cases (last updated September 9, 2013)

Case Name Description and Location of For-Profit Company

Circuit Where Case Filed

Date Filed Status

1 Tyndale House v. Sebelius

Tyndale is an Illinois for-profit publishing company focusing on Christian books.

D.C. Circuit 10/2/2012 District court granted a preliminary injunction. The government appealed to the D.C. Circuit on January 15, 2013. Proceedings in the district court are stayed until the D.C. Circuit resolves the appeal of the preliminary injunction. After Tyndale was assigned to the same panel of judges on the D.C. Circuit as Gilardi, the government moved to voluntarily dismiss the appeal, arguing that the two cases present distinct issues. The D.C. Circuit granted the government’s motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal. The district court denied the government’s motion to stay the case pending the D.C. Circuit’s decision in Gilardi. The plaintiffs and the government are both seeking summary judgment.

2 Gilardi v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

Freshway Foods is a fresh produce processor and packer. Freshway Logistics is a for-hire carrier of mainly refrigerated products. The companies are Ohio-based for-profits that serve 23 states.

D.C. Circuit 1/24/2013 District court denied a preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs appealed the denial of the preliminary injunction to the D.C. Circuit. The D.C. Circuit granted an injunction pending the appeal. Proceedings in the district court are stayed pending the D.C. Circuit resolving the appeal of the preliminary injunction. The D.C. Circuit will hear oral arguments on the preliminary injunction

https://ecf.cadc.uscourts.gov/cmecf/servlet/TransportRoom?servlet=CaseSummary.jsp&caseNum=13-5018&incOrigDkt=Y&incDktEntries=Y

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?84442437311278-L_1_0-1


on September 24, 2013.

Amicus brief filed in the D.C. Circuit on behalf of NWLC and 14 other national, regional, state and local organizations.

3 Johnson Welded Products v. Sebelius

Johnson Welded Products is an Ohio-based manufacturer of reservoirs for air brake systems.

D.C. Circuit 4/30/2013 District court granted an unopposed motion for temporary injunctive relief and stayed the case pending the D.C. Circuit’s decision in Gilardi.

4 M&N Plastics v. Sebelius

M&N Plastics is a Michigan-based supplier of custom injection molding products.

D.C. Circuit 5/31/2013 Complaint filed. The parties are debating the government’s motion to transfer the case back to Michigan, where the plaintiffs originally filed a case (Nagle v. Sebelius).

5 Willis & Willis PLC v. Sebelius

Willis & Willis PLC is a Michigan-based law firm.

D.C. Circuit 7/24/2013 District court granted unopposed motions for a preliminary injunction and to stay the case pending a decision in Gilardi.

6 Trijicon, Inc. v. Sebelius (also known as Bindon v. Sebelius)

Trijicon, Inc. is a Michigan-based maker of aiming systems for firearms.

D.C. Circuit 8/5/2013 District court granted unopposed motions for a preliminary injunction and to stay the case pending a decision in Gilardi.

7 Mersino Dewatering, Inc. v. Sebelius

Mersino Dewatering, Inc. is a Michigan-based company that provides dewatering (water removal) services. It has branches in Michigan, Florida, North Carolina, Nebraska, and Pennsylvania

D.C. Circuit 9/3/2013 Complaint filed.

8 Barron Industries v. Sebelius

Barron Industries, Inc. is a Michigan-based company that produces metal castings for various industries.


9 Midwest Fastener Corp. v. Sebelius

Midwest Fastener Corp. is a Michigan-based company that



supplies fasteners to the hardware store, home center, and industrial markets.

10 Geneva College v. Sebelius This case includes non-profit as well as for-profit plaintiffs.

The Pennsylvania-based for-profit plaintiffs are Seneca Hardwood, a lumber business, and WLH Enterprises, a sawmill. Geneva College is a Pennsylvania-based non-profit.

Third Circuit

2/21/2012 The district court granted a preliminary injunction to the for-profit plaintiffs. The government appealed to the 3

rd Circuit.

The district court initially granted the motion to dismiss for the non-profit plaintiff, Geneva College, on grounds of ripeness. However, the district court then granted Geneva College’s motion for reconsideration, stating that some of Geneva College’s claims were ripe. The district court then granted a preliminary injunction to Geneva College. The government is appealing this decision to the 3

rd Circuit.

11 Conestoga Wood Specialties Corporation v. Sebelius

Conestoga Wood Specialties Corporation is a Pennsylvania-based wood cabinet and specialty products manufacturer.

Third Circuit 12/4/2012 District court initially granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) but then dismissed a motion for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs appealed to the 3

rd Circuit and asked for

a stay pending appeal. The 3

rd Circuit denied the stay

pending appeal and then affirmed the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction. The 3

rd Circuit

denied plaintiffs’ request for en banc review. Plaintiffs have said they will seek to appeal the case to the Supreme Court. The 3

rd

Circuit denied plaintiffs’ motion to stay the decision until the conclusion of plaintiffs’ planned appeal to the Supreme Court. Amicus brief filed in the 3

rd

https://ecf.ca3.uscourts.gov/cmecf/servlet/TransportRoom?servlet=CaseSummary.jsp&caseNum=13-1144&incOrigDkt=Y&incDktEntries=Y


Circuit on behalf of NWLC and 15 other national, regional, state and local organizations.

12 Holland et al v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

Holland Chevrolet is a West Virginia-based corporation engaged in selling and servicing motor vehicles.

Fourth Circuit

6/24/2013 Plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs then asked the court for permission to withdraw the motion; the district court granted their request and cancelled the July 23 hearing on the motion. Plaintiffs have filed an amended complaint and the government submitted a motion to dismiss.

13 Weingartz Supply Company v. Sebelius (also known as Legatus v. Sebelius)

Weingartz Supply Company is a secular Michigan company that sells outdoor power equipment. Legatus is a non-profit organization comprising more than 4000 members including individuals and professional organizations.

Sixth Circuit 5/7/2012 District court granted a preliminary injunction for plaintiff Daniel Weingartz and Weingartz Supply Company, but not the non-profit plaintiff Legatus. With respect to the for-profit plaintiff, Weingartz: the government appealed to the 6

th Circuit the grant of

the preliminary injunction. The 6

th Circuit denied the

government’s motion to hold the case in abeyance pending a ruling in Autocam. It will hear oral argument on October 9, 2013. With respect to the non-profit plaintiff, Legatus: the plaintiffs cross-appealed the denial of a preliminary injunction to Legatus and the district court stayed the proceedings pending resolution of that appeal. The 6

th Circuit granted

plaintiffs’ unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss their cross-appeal. The district court then granted an unopposed motion to lift the stay and


reopen the case with regard to Legatus in light of the government’s final contraceptive coverage rule. Plaintiffs’ submitted an amended complaint. Amicus brief filed in the 6

th


14 Autocam Corporation et al. v. Sebelius

Autocam Automotive makes parts for transportation while Autocam Medical makes medical equipment. These are West-Michigan-based manufacturing companies that operate across the United States.

Sixth Circuit 10/8/2012 District court denied a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs appealed to the 6

th

Circuit. On December 26, 2012 plaintiffs filed an emergency motion for an injunction before the 6

th

Circuit. The 6th

Circuit denied an injunction pending appeal and a motion to reconsider. On June 11, 2013, the 6

th Circuit

heard oral arguments on the denial of the preliminary injunction. The district court is simultaneously reviewing a motion to dismiss. Amicus brief filed in the 6

th

Circuit on behalf of NWLC and 22 other national, regional, and state organizations.

15 Domino’s Farms Corporation v. Sebelius

Domino’s Farms is a Michigan-based property management company.

Sixth Circuit 12/14/2012 District court granted a preliminary injunction. The government appealed to the 6

th Circuit. The district court

granted the government’s motion to stay the case in the district court pending the 6

th Circuit’s decision in

Autocam or Weingartz. The 6

th Circuit denied the

government’s motion to hold the appeal in abeyance pending its decision in Autocam and the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the appeal.



Amicus brief filed in the 6

th

Circuit on behalf of NWLC and 17 other national, regional, state, and local organizations.

16 Infrastructure Alternatives Inc. v. Sebelius

Infrastructure Alternatives is a Michigan corporation. It is a contractor in the fields of environmental dredging, contaminated sediment remediation, geotextile tube installation, and water treatment operations.

Sixth Circuit 1/10/2013 Parties debating motion to dismiss. The district court will not move forward with this case pending the 6

th

Circuit’s decision in Autocam.

17 Mersino Management Company v. Sebelius

Mersino Management Co. is a Michigan-based management company and provides insurance for Mersino Enterprises, Mersino Dewatering, Global Pump Co., and Mersino South-West.

Sixth Circuit 3/22/2013 The district court denied a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs appealed to the 6

th Circuit. The district

court agreed to the parties’ request to stay the case pending the appeal.

18 Eden Foods Inc. v. Sebelius

Eden Foods is a Michigan-based corporation that specializes in supplying macrobiotic, organic food.

Sixth Circuit 3/20/2013 District court denied plaintiffs’ emergency motion for a temporary injunction and preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs appealed to the 6

th Circuit. The 6

th Circuit

denied the plaintiffs’ motion for an injunction pending appeal and the government’s motion to hold the case in abeyance pending the 6

th Circuit’s

decision in Autocam, and agreed to expedite the case. The 6

th Circuit will hear oral

argument on October 2, 2013. The district court granted


the parties’ joint motion to stay the case pending the resolution of the appeal. Amicus brief filed in the 6

th

Circuit on behalf of NWLC and 19 other national, regional, state, and local organizations.

19 MK Chambers Company v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

MK Chambers Company is a Michigan-based supplier of specialty machining.

Sixth Circuit 3/28/2013 District court denied plaintiffs’ emergency motion for a temporary restraining order. The plaintiffs then filed an emergency motion for a preliminary injunction. The government filed a motion to dismiss. After hearing oral argument on July 24, 2013, the district court denied plaintiffs’ emergency motion for a preliminary injunction.

20 Nagle v. Sebelius Christopher Nagle is an owner and CFO of M&N Plastics, a Michigan-based supplier of custom injection molding products.

Sixth Circuit 5/08/2013 District court granted plaintiffs’ request to dismiss the case without prejudice. Case is closed. The Nagles then filed M&N Plastics v. Sebelius in the district court for D.C.

21 Korte & Luitjohan Contractors v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

Korte & Luitjohan Contractors, Inc., is an Illinois-based full-service construction contractor.

Seventh Circuit

10/9/2012 District court denied a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs appealed to the 7

th

Circuit and asked for an injunction pending appeal. The 7

th Circuit granted the

emergency motion for an injunction pending appeal over the strong dissent of one judge. The 7

th Circuit

has consolidated this case with Grote Industries. The 7

th Circuit heard the oral

argument on the preliminary injunction on May 22, 2013. Amicus brief filed in the 7

th

Circuit on behalf of NWLC and 13 other national organizations.


22 Triune Health Group v. Sebelius (also known as Yep v. Sebelius)

Triune is a secular Illinois corporation that specializes in facilitating the re-entry of injured workers into the workforce.

Seventh Circuit

8/22/2012 District court granted a preliminary injunction because it construed the 7

th

Circuit decision in Korte as binding. The government appealed to the 7

th Circuit,

asked the district court to stay proceedings pending appeal, and asked the 7

th

Circuit to hold the case in abeyance pending Korte. Both courts granted the government’s request to temporarily suspend the proceedings.

23 Grote Industries v. Sebelius

Grote Industries is an Indiana-based, privately held business manufacturing vehicle safety systems.

Seventh Circuit

10/29/2012 The district court denied a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs appealed to the 7

th

Circuit. The 7th

Circuit consolidated the case with Korte and, applying its own analysis in Korte to this case, granted Grote Industries a temporary injunction pending appeal, over the strong dissent of one judge. The 7

th Circuit heard the oral

argument on the preliminary injunction on May 22, 2013. Amicus brief filed in the 7

th

Circuit on behalf of NWLC and 13 other national organizations.

24 Tonn and Blank Construction v. Sebelius

Tonn and Black Construction, LLC, is an Indiana construction company.

Seventh Circuit

9/20/2012 The district court granted the plaintiff’s request to issue uncontested injunctive relief and the government’s request to stay the case pending rulings in the consolidated cases of Korte and Grote.

25 Lindsay, Rappaport and Postel LLC v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

LR&P is an Illinois-based law firm that primarily practices in insurance defense, insurance coverage, and appellate work.

Seventh Circuit

2/14/2013 Parties agreed to stay the case and the enforcement of the benefit pending the outcome in the Grote and Korte appeals.

26 Hartenbower v. The Hartenbowers Seventh 3/26/2013 District court granted an

https://ecf.innd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?99694807245164-L_452_0-1


United States Department of Health and Human Services

co-own Hart Electric LLC, an Illinois-based manufacturer of electrical components, and H.I. Cable.

Circuit unopposed motion for temporary injunctive relief and stayed the case pending rulings in the consolidated cases of Korte and Grote.

27 Ozinga v. United States Department of Human Services

The Ozingas are owners and senior managers of Ozinga Bros. Inc., an Illinois-based producer of ready-made concrete.

Seventh Circuit

5/1/2013 District court granted an unopposed motion for a preliminary injunction and stayed the case pending the 7

th Circuit’s rulings in the

consolidated cases of Korte and Grote.

28 O'Brien v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

O’Brien Industrial Holding is a Missouri company engaged in the exploration, mining, processing, manufacturing, and distribution of refractory and ceramic raw materials.

Eighth Circuit

3/15/2012 The district court granted the motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs appealed to the 8

th Circuit. On November

28, 2012, the 8th

Circuit issued a stay pending the appeal, over the dissent of one judge. The 8th Circuit denied the motion to consolidate with Annex Medical. Amicus brief filed in the 8

th

Circuit on behalf of NWLC.

29 American Pulverizer Co. v. United States Department of Health and Human Services (also known as Griesedieck v Sebelius)

Springfield Iron and Metal, LLC, American Pulverizer Company, Hustler Conveyor Company, and City Welding are four Missouri-based companies involved in the business of wholesale scrap metal recycling and manufacturing of related machines.

Eighth Circuit

10/19/2012 District court granted a preliminary injunction in part because of the O’Brien stay precedent. The government appealed the preliminary injunction to the 8

th Circuit. Proceedings in

the district court are stayed pending the appeal. Following the government’s request, the 8

th Circuit

agreed to hold the case in abeyance pending the O’Brien ruling.

30 Annex Medical Inc. v. Sebelius

Annex Medical and Sacred Heart Medical are companies that design, manufacture, and sell medical devices. They are owned by Stuart

Eighth Circuit

11/2/2012 District court denied a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs, Stuart Lind and Annex Medical, appealed to the 8

th Circuit. The 8

th Circuit

granted an injunction




Lind. Tom Janas is an additional plaintiff who is an entrepreneur who has owned several dairy businesses in the past and intends to purchase another in 2013. He currently operates Habile Holdings and Venture North Properties, companies that lease commercial properties but currently have no employees.

pending appeal, relying on the O’Brien order. The 8th Circuit denied the motion to consolidate with O’Brien. Amicus brief filed in the 8

th


31 Sharpe Holdings Inc. v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

Sharpe Holdings, Inc. is a Missouri corporation that is involved in the farming, dairy, creamery, and cheese-making industries. Three additional plaintiffs have been added to the case: Ozark National Life Insurance Company, a Missouri insurance corporation, N.I.S. Financial Services, a Missouri mutual fund broker, and CNS Corporation, the Missouri-based holding company for Ozark, N.I.S. and Sharpe Holdings.

Eighth Circuit

12/20/2012 District court granted a temporary restraining order (TRO). On January 14, 2013, the district court continued the TRO until the court rules on further injunctive relief. Parties are debating a motion to stay proceedings in the district court pending rulings in O’Brien and Annex Medical. The court granted a motion to add three additional plaintiffs to the case. The court also granted these plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunctive relief.

32 Sioux Chief MFG. Co, Inc. v. Sebelius

Sioux Chief MFG. Co, Inc. is a Missouri Corporation that manufactures plumbing products.

Eighth Circuit

1/14/2013 The district court granted a preliminary injunction and the motion to stay all proceedings pending rulings in O’Brien and Annex Medical.

33 Hall v. Sebelius Reverend Gregory Hall is a Catholic Deacon who owns

Eighth Circuit

2/5/2013 District court granted an unopposed motion for temporary injunctive relief

https://ecf.moed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?986184903032508-L_1_0-1

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?603261705667892-L_1_0-1

https://ecf.mnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?592784119380762-L_1_0-1


American Mfg Company, a Minnesota-based company that manufactures and markets mining equipment, mud pumps, and parts for global distribution.

and stayed the case pending rulings in O’Brien and Annex Medical.

34 Bick Holdings Inc. v. United States Department of Health & Human Services

Bick Holdings Inc. is a Missouri-based holding company for operating companies Bick Group Inc., Bick Properties Inc., and SEALCO LLC. Through these subsidiaries BHI engages in data center consulting, design, maintenance, service, and cleaning.

Eighth Circuit

3/13/2013 District court granted an unopposed motion for a preliminary injunction. Parties agreed to stay the case and the enforcement of the benefit pending the rulings in O’Brien and Annex Medical.

35 SMA LLC. v. Sebelius

SMA LLC is a Minnesota based agricultural/industrial construction company.

Eighth Circuit

6/6/2013 District court granted an unopposed motion for a preliminary injunction. Parties agreed to stay the case and the enforcement of the benefit pending the rulings in O’Brien and Annex Medical.

36 Medford v. Sebelius (also known as QC Group v. Sebelius)

The QC Group Inc is a Minnesota-based corporation, owned by Daniel Medford and David DeVowe, which provides quality control services.

Eighth Circuit

7/2/2013 District court granted an unopposed motion for a preliminary injunction and stayed the case until 30 days after a decision in O’Brien or Annex Medical.

37 Newland v. Sebelius

Hercules Industries, Inc. is a Colorado corporation that manufactures heating, ventilation, and air conditioning products, owned by the Newlands and another plaintiff.

Tenth Circuit

4/30/2012 District court granted a preliminary injunction. The government appealed to the 10

th Circuit.

38 Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., et al. v. Sebelius

Hobby Lobby is a national craft supply chain with headquarters in Oklahoma. Mardel

Tenth Circuit

9/12/2012 The district court denied a preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs appealed to the 10

th Circuit. While that



(another plaintiff) is a privately held bookstore and education company specializing in Christian books and religious texts.

appeal was pending, the 10th

Circuit denied separate injunctive relief. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court for the separate relief but the Supreme Court refused to hear the case. A divided 10

th Circuit

reversed the lower court’s denial of injunctive relief and returned the case to the district court to reconsider whether to grant a preliminary injunction. After the 10

th Circuit’s

decision, the district court granted the plaintiffs’ emergency motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The case is stayed until October 1, 2013. Amicus brief filed in the 10

th


39 Briscoe v. Sebelius

Continuum Health Partnership is a Colorado-based oxygen supply company. Conessione is an Investment company.

Tenth Circuit

2/4/2013 District court denied a temporary restraining order. The district court will hold a hearing on the request for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs filed a request for the district court to hear and rule on the motion for a preliminary injunction as soon as possible and an emergency motion for temporary injunctive relief pending that ruling. Following the district court decision granting Hobby Lobby a preliminary injunction, the plaintiffs filed a second motion for temporary injunctive relief and the government filed a brief in opposition.


The parties submitted answers to additional questions the district court instructed them to brief.

40 Armstrong v. Sebelius

Cherry Creek Mortgage Co. is a Colorado-based full-service residential mortgage banking company.

Tenth Circuit

3/5/2013 District court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs appealed to the 10

th Circuit.

The district court case is stayed pending the appeal. The 10

th Circuit granted the

government’s motion to hold the plaintiff’s appeal in abeyance pending the 10

th

Circuit’s decision in Hobby Lobby. After the 10

th Circuit’s

decision in Hobby Lobby, the plaintiffs filed a motion with the district court for an injunction pending appeal and requested a decision as soon as possible.

The 10th

Circuit vacated the district court’s denial of the preliminary injunction and remanded the case to the district court to proceed in light of its en banc decision in Hobby Lobby.

The plaintiffs had also filed a motion with the 10

th Circuit

for an injunction pending appeal, which the court denied as moot. .

41 Beckwith Electric Co. v. Sebelius

Beckwith Electric Co. is a Florida-based provider of micro-processor-based technology.

Eleventh Circuit

3/12/2013 The district court granted a preliminary injunction. The government appealed to the 11

th Circuit. The district

court stayed its proceedings pending further order by the circuit court.


Non-Profit Cases (last updated September 9, 2013)

Name of Case and State Where Plaintiffs Located


Date Filed

Status

1 Belmont Abbey Coll. v. Sebelius North Carolina

D.C. Circuit 11/10/2011 District court dismissed on grounds of standing and ripeness. Plaintiffs appealed to the D.C. Circuit. D.C. Circuit had been holding the case until the government completed its rulemaking on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to non-profits with religious objections. On August 13, 2013, after considering the parties’ joint motion to terminate the abeyance status and remand to the district court in light of the final contraceptive coverage rules, the D.C. Circuit ordered that the consolidated cases of Belmont Abbey and Wheaton College be sent back to the district court, instructing the district court to vacate its judgments and dismiss the complaints as moot. The district court vacated its judgment and dismissed the complaints as moot.

2 Wheaton College v. Sebelius Illinois

D.C. Circuit 7/18/2012 District court dismissed on grounds of standing and ripeness. Plaintiffs appealed to the D.C. Circuit. D.C. Circuit had been holding the case until the government completed its rulemaking on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to non-profits with religious objections. On August 13, 2013, after considering the parties’ joint motion to terminate the abeyance status and remand to the district court in light of the final contraceptive coverage rules, the D.C. Circuit ordered that the consolidated cases of Belmont Abbey and Wheaton College be sent back to the district court to vacate its judgments and dismiss the complaints as moot. The district court vacated its judgment and dismissed the complaints as moot.

3 Roman Catholic Archbishop of Washington v. Sebelius Washington, D.C.

D.C. Circuit 5/21/2012 The district court dismissed the case on grounds of ripeness. The plaintiffs appealed to the D.C. Circuit. The D.C. Circuit denied plaintiffs’ motion to summarily reverse and ruled to hold the appeal in abeyance, pending a decision in the consolidated cases of Belmont Abbey and Wheaton College. The D.C. Circuit then


dismissed as moot the appeal with respect to the initial contraceptive coverage regulations. Following the D.C. Circuit’s decision in Wheaton, plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction against the final contraceptive coverage rule in the D.C. Circuit, which the court denied, stating that such relief should first be sought in the district court.

4 Priests for Life v. Sebelius (II) New York

D.C. Circuit 8/19/2013 Complaint filed challenging the final contraceptive coverage rule.

5 Priests for Life v. Sebelius New York

Second Circuit 2/15/2012 On January 8, 2013, the district court deemed the Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order moot based on the government’s agreement that Plaintiffs qualify for the delay in compliance. On April 12, 2013, the court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of ripeness. Case is closed.

6 Roman Catholic Archdiocese of NY v. Sebelius New York

Second Circuit 5/21/2012 The district court granted the motion to dismiss for the Diocese and Catholic Charities because they lack standing, but denied it for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York, the Catholic Health Care System and the Catholic Health Services of Long Island. The district court had stayed the case for these plaintiffs until the government completed its rulemaking on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to religiously-affiliated non-profits. Plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint challenging the final contraceptive coverage rule.

7 Rev. Lawrence T Persico (Formerly Donald W. Trautman) v. Sebelius Pennsylvania

Third Circuit 5/21/2012 District court denied a preliminary injunction and granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of ripeness. Case is closed.

8 Most Rev. David A Zubik v. Sebelius Pennsylvania

Third Circuit 5/21/2012 District court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of standing and ripeness. Plaintiffs appealed to the 3

rd Circuit. After

the rule on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to religiously-affiliated non-profits was

https://ecf.ca3.uscourts.gov/cmecf/servlet/TransportRoom?servlet=DocketReportFilter.jsp


finalized, the parties requested voluntarily dismissal of the appeal, which the 3

rd

Circuit granted. Case is closed.

9 Liberty University v. Geithner

Fourth Circuit 2/27/13 Revised complaint filed with the 4th

Circuit to include a challenge to the contraceptive coverage benefit, in addition to challenges against the employer and individual responsibility provisions. The original complaint – which did not include a challenge to the contraceptive coverage requirement – was filed March 23, 2010. It has a complicated history in the courts, including being vacated and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. But on November 26, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court remanded the case to the 4

th Circuit

for further consideration in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (upholding the Affordable Care Act). The 4

th Circuit affirmed dismissal of

challenges to the individual and employer responsibility provisions. The 4

th Circuit

declined to consider the challenge to the contraceptive coverage benefit. The 4

th

Circuit then denied the plaintiffs’ motion to stay pending determination of the cert petition they were preparing to file at the Supreme Court. Plaintiffs filed a cert petition with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Court to review the 4

th Circuit’s dismissal of its challenge to

the individual and employer responsibility provisions. In addition, plaintiffs asked the Court to review the 4

th Circuit’s refusal to

consider its challenge to the contraceptive coverage benefit, which plaintiffs characterize as part of the employer responsibility provision “as fully defined.”

10 Louisiana College v. Sebelius Louisiana

Fifth Circuit 2/18/2012 District court ordered that the case be stayed until August 15, 2013 at which time the government must provide the court with a status report as to the rulemaking on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to religiously-affiliated non-profits and other relevant then



pending litigation. In light of the stay the court dismissed all pending motions, including the motion to dismiss. In its August 15 status report, the government stated that its final rule on the contraceptive coverage benefit places no burden on plaintiff’s religious exercise, so the case should close; however, should plaintiff file an amended complaint challenging the new rule, the government would move to dismiss the case or for summary judgment.

11 Roman Catholic Diocese of Dallas v. Sebelius Texas

Fifth Circuit 5/21/2012 District court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of ripeness. Case is closed.

12 Roman Catholic Diocese of Fort Worth v. Sebelius Texas

Fifth Circuit 5/21/2012 The district court denied the motion to dismiss and the motion to stay. The district court denied the government’s motion for reconsideration and refused to certify its original order for immediate appeal. On August 22, 2013, plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint challenging the final contraceptive coverage rule.

13 Roman Catholic Diocese of Biloxi v Sebelius Mississippi

Fifth Circuit 5/21/2012 District court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of ripeness. The plaintiffs filed a motion to amend/alter the judgment, which the district court also denied. Case is closed.

14 East Texas Baptist University and Houston Baptist University v. Sebelius Texas

Fifth Circuit 10/9/2012 District court had stayed the case until the government completed its rulemaking on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to religiously-affiliated non-profits. On July 31, 2013, the court granted the plaintiffs’ unopposed motion to lift the stay and continue with the litigation. Plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint challenging the final contraceptive coverage rule. Westminster Theological has intervened as an additional plaintiff. Plaintiffs have submitted motions for partial summary judgment and for a preliminary injunction. The district court has set a schedule for the continuing litigation, including a hearing on the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary


injunction on October 25, 2013.

15 Criswell College v. Sebelius Texas

Fifth Circuit 11/1/2012 The court dismissed the case on grounds of ripeness. Case is closed.

16 American Family Association v. Sebelius

Fifth Circuit 2/20/2013 Complaint and motion for preliminary injunction filed in response to the government’s proposed rule on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to religiously-affiliated non-profits that was issued February 1, 2013. Government filed a motion to dismiss. After the rule was finalized, plaintiffs submitted notice to voluntarily dismiss the case. Case is closed.

17 Franciscan University of Steubenville v. Sebelius Michigan

Sixth Circuit 5/21/2012 Court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of ripeness. Case is closed.

18 Catholic Diocese of Nashville v. Sebelius Tennessee

Sixth Circuit 9/12/2012 District court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of standing and ripeness. Plaintiffs appealed to the 6

th Circuit. On

February 28, 2013, the 6th

Circuit granted the plaintiff’s request to dismiss the case without prejudice. Case is closed.

19 University of Notre Dame v. Sebelius Indiana

Seventh Circuit

5/21/2012 District court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of standing and ripeness. On March 1, 2013, the plaintiffs appealed to the 7

th Circuit. After the rule on the

application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to religiously-affiliated non-profits was finalized, the 7

th Circuit dismissed the

appeal pursuant to the parties’ joint motion to voluntarily dismiss. Case is closed.

20 Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Inc. v. Sebelius Indiana

Seventh Circuit

5/21/2012 District court had stayed the case until the government completed its rulemaking on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to religiously-affiliated non-profits. The court denied the plaintiff’s motion to consolidate with Tonn and Blank, a for-profit case in the same circuit. After the rule was finalized, the court lifted the stay and issued a pretrial schedule for the continuing litigation. Plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint challenging the final contraceptive coverage rule and a motion for a


preliminary injunction.

21 Catholic Diocese of Peoria v. Sebelius Illinois

Seventh Circuit

8/9/2012 District court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of ripeness. Case is closed.

22 Conlon v. Sebelius Illinois

Seventh Circuit

5/21/2012 District court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of ripeness and standing. Case is closed.

23 Grace Schools v. Sebelius Indiana

Seventh Circuit

8/23/2012 The district court stayed the case in light of the final rulemaking on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to religiously-affiliated non-profits. After the rule was finalized, plaintiffs submitted a letter asking to proceed with the lawsuit. On July 31, 2013, the court lifted the stay and issued a pretrial schedule for the continuing litigation. In addition, the government withdrew its pending motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs then submitted an amended complaint challenging the final contraceptive coverage rule and a motion for a preliminary injunction.

24 CNS Ministries v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Missouri

Eighth Circuit 11/20/2012 District court granted plaintiffs’ request to dismiss the case without prejudice. Case is closed.

25 Archdiocese of St. Louis v. Sebelius Missouri

Eighth Circuit 5/21/2012 District court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of ripeness and standing. Case is closed.

26 College of the Ozarks v. Sebelius Missouri

Eighth Circuit 9/17/2012 District court granted plaintiffs’ request to dismiss the case without prejudice. Case is closed.

27 The School of the Ozarks v. RightChoice Managed Care Inc., Healthy Alliance Life Insurance, HMO Missouri, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Department of Treasury, Jack Law & Kathleen

Eighth Circuit 4/19/2013 Complaint filed. Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their claims against RightChoice Managed Care, Healthy Alliance Life Insurance, and HMO Missouri.


Sebelius Missouri

28 Colorado Christian University v. Sebelius Colorado

Tenth Circuit 12/22/2011 District court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of ripeness. Case is closed.

29 Colorado Christian University v. Sebelius (II) Colorado

Tenth Circuit 8/7/13 Complaint filed challenging the final contraceptive coverage rule.

30 Eternal Word Television Network, Inc. v. Sebelius Alabama

Eleventh Circuit


31 Ave Maria University v. Sebelius Florida

Eleventh Circuit


32 Ave Maria University v. Sebelius (II) Florida

Eleventh Circuit

8/29/2013 Complaint filed challenging the final contraceptive coverage rule.

33 The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta v. Sebelius Georgia

Eleventh Circuit

10/5/2012 After the government finalized its rule on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to religiously-affiliated non-profits, plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction.

34 The Most Reverend Thomas Wenski v Sebelius (also known as Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Miami v. Sebelius) Florida

Eleventh Circuit



Other Cases (last updated September 9, 2013)

Case Name Description of Plaintiffs


Date Filed Status

1 Wieland v. Sebelius

Paul Wieland is a member of the Missouri House of Representatives.

Eighth Circuit 8/14/2013 Complaint and motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction filed..

2

State of Nebraska et al. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

The states of Nebraska, South Carolina, Michigan, Texas, Florida, Ohio, and Oklahoma

Eighth Circuit 2/23/2012 District court granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of standing and ripeness. The plaintiffs appealed to the 8

th

Circuit and then, after the government issued its proposed rule on the application of the contraceptive coverage benefit to religiously-affiliated non-profits on February 1, 2013, requested a stay of the proceedings pending the final rule. The 8

th Circuit granted

plaintiffs’ motion to voluntarily dismiss the case. The case is closed.

Documents

Overview of the Lawsuits Challenging the Affordable Care … · · 2015-10-16Overview of the Lawsuits Challenging the Affordable Care Act’s No Cost-Sharing Contraceptive Coverage