Sidibe

Sidibe v. Sutter Health

Good Law
4 F. Supp. 3d 1160·2013 WL 5956315·2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160512
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 7, 2013No. C 12-04854 LBCalifornia8,919 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Beeler, J.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS

[Re: ECF Nos. 40 & 41]

INTRODUCTION

In this putative class action, Plaintiffs Djeneba Sidibe and Diane Dewey sued Sutter Health, a company that owns and operates hospitals and other health care service providers, alleging that Sutter’s anticompetitive conduct in the health care services industry in Northern California violates federal and state antitrust laws and California’s unfair competition law. See generally Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”), ECF No. 37. 1 The alleged anti-competitive conduct includes (1) Sutter’s imposing tying arrangements that require health plans to include all Sutter providers in their networks in order to have reduced rate access at Sutter’s hospitals and (2) Sutter’s use of its market power to maintain and enhance its monopolies over Inpatient Hospital Services in Northern California. Sutter moved to dismiss for lack of standing and for failure to state a claim. See Motion, ECF No. 40. The court grants Sutter’s motion to dismiss without prejudice and with leave to amend.

STATEMENT

I. THE PARTIES

A. Sutter Health

Defendant Sutter Health is a California non-profit corporation that controls the largest and most…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.