STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO WITHDRAW DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION (DKT. 71) TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STAY (DKT. 68) AND TO STAY THE LITIGATION

EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.

Plaintiffs David Bain, Dayna Bain, and Alaina Bain (collectively, "Plaintiffs") and Defendants Oxford Health Insurance, Inc. and United Behavioral Health (collectively, "Defendants") do hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

RECITALS

WHEREAS, on April 4, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Stay Action and Alternative Motion to Continue Summary Judgment Schedule ("the Motion for Stay"), which is presently scheduled to be heard on April 13, 2017 (see Dkt. 68);

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs' Motion requests, inter alia, that this Court stay the above-captioned litigation until November 16, 2017, in light of the pending matters of Wit v. United Behavioral Health, N.D. Cal. Case No. 14-cv-02346-JCS, and Alexander v. United Behavioral Health, N.D. Cal. Case No. 14-cv-05337-JCS (collectively, "Wit");

WHEREAS, Defendants filed an opposition on April 7, 2017 (see Dkt. 71), and Plaintiffs filed a reply on April 10, 2017 (see Dkt. 73);

WHEREAS, Defendants contend that if a judgment is entered with respect to the class currently certified in Wit, such judgment will preclude all of the claims currently asserted by Plaintiffs in the above-captioned action in their entirety, subject to any opt-out rights;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs dispute Defendants' contention for multiple reasons, including, but not limited to, the fact that the instant lawsuit includes multiple claims not raised or contemplated to be adjudicated in Wit, and that will not be resolved by Wit, including but not limited to claims concerning the adequacy and propriety of Defendant's termination of benefits Plaintiff Alaina Bain's residential treatment under ERISA and the ERISA claims regulation, claims for monetary benefits, claims for penalties under ERISA § 502(c), and otherwise (whereas, by contrast, Wit is expressly seeking only re-adjudication — not monetary benefits — of claims denied based on an allegedly improper Level of Care Guideline); and neither a judgment nor a settlement in a class action such as Wit resolves or produce a waiver or release of claims outside the scope of those actually litigated. See National Super Spuds v. N.Y Mercantile Exchange, 660 F.2d 9, 18 (2d Cir. 1981); and

WHEREAS, despite their differing positions on these issues, all parties believe that the requested stay is appropriate;

STIPULATION

THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, Defendants hereby withdraw their opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Stay, and Plaintiffs and Defendants hereby stipulate and agree that the above-captioned litigation should be stayed until November 16, 2017, as requested in Plaintiffs' Motion for Stay.

The undersigned, on behalf of their respective clients, do so stipulate.

ATTESTATION

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories.

ORDER UPON STIPULATION

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing, the Court hereby stays the above-captioned litigation until November 16, 2017, as requested in the Motion to Stay (Dkt. 68).

It is so ORDERD.