Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Delaware overruled Plaintiffs’ objections to a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation and adopted the Report. The court held that the No Surprises Act does not create a private right of action and that Plaintiffs could not circumvent that omission by asserting a state-law theory, granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss and denying its motion to stay as moot.
Holdings
- The No Surprises Act does not create a private right of action.
- Plaintiffs may not circumvent Congress's omission of a private right of action in the No Surprises Act by seeking to enforce a federal right through a state-law theory.
Questions Presented
- Whether the No Surprises Act creates a private right of action.
- Whether Plaintiffs may circumvent the No Surprises Act's omission of a private right of action by seeking to enforce a federal right through a state-law theory.
- Whether Defendant's motion to dismiss should be granted and its motion to stay denied as moot.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (2)
- EEOC v. City of Long Branch, 866 F.3d 93, 99-100 (3d Cir. 2017)(followed)
- Guardian Flight, L.L.C. v. Health Care Serv. Corp., 140 F.4th 271, 277 (5th Cir. 2025)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…