Case 2:18-cv-02217-WB Document 1 Filed 05/25/18 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF AETNA INC, AETNA HEALTH, INC, AETNA HEALTH MANAGEMENT LLC and AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, CIVIL ACTION Plaintiffs, V. N0. MEDNAX, INC, PEDIATRIX MEDICAL GROUP, INC and MEDNAX SERVICES, INC, Defendants. NOTICE OF REMOVAL Case 2:18-cv-02217-WB Document 1 Filed 05/25/18 Page 2 of 7 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332, 1441, and 1446, Defendants MEDNAX, Inc. Pediatrix Medical Group, Inc. and MEDNAX Services, Inc. and collectively with MEDNAX and PMI, ?Defendants?), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby give notice of removal of this action, captioned Aetna Inc. et al. v. MEDNAX, Inc. at LIL, November Term 2017, Civil No. 01040, Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Commonwealth of (?Court of Common Pleas?), to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1446(a), Defendants provide the following statement of the grounds for removal: BACKGROUND 1. Plaintiffs commenced the above?captioned civil action in the Court of Common Pleas by ?ling a Writ of Summons on November 10, 2017, followed by the ?ling of a complaint on April 25, 2018 (the ?Complaint? or Plaintiffs? Complaint falsely claims that Defendants invented and executed a scheme to defraud Plaintiffs of millions of dollars through the use of fraudulent billing practices related to the necessary and life?saving treatment of critically ill newborn children. See Compl. 1-4. 2. Defendants were served with a copy of the Complaint on May 8. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1446(a), a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders served on Defendants are attached hereto as Exhibit A. A copy of the state court docket and all documents ?led in the state court action (other than the Complaint) are attached hereto as Exhibit B. VENUE AND JURISDICTION 3. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 118(a), 1441(a), and 1446(a) because the Court of Common Pleas, where the Complaint was originally filed, is a state court located within the Eastern District of Case 2:18-cv-02217-WB Document 1 Filed 05/25/18 Page 3 of 7 4. As shown below, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a) because (1) there is complete diversity of citizenship between Plaintiffs and Defendants, (2) the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interests and costs, and (3) all other requirements for removal have been satis?ed. ARGUMENT 1. Removal of This Action Is Proper Based on Diversity Jurisdiction 5. This Court has original jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332. Diversity jurisdiction exists where (I) the suit is between citizens of different states and (2) the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. See 28 U.S.C. 1332(a); Hay?eld v. Home Depot USA, Inc, 168 F. Supp. 2d 436, 445 (ED. Pa. 2001). 6. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1446(b)(2)(A), all Defendants have been properly served in this action and join in its removal to this Court. A. Complete Diversity of Citizenship Exists Between Plaintiffs and Defendants 7. Plaintiff Aetna Inc. is a corporation with its principal place of business in Connecticut. Compl. 1] 7. 8. Plaintiff Aetna Health, Inc. is a managed care corporation organized under the laws of Texas. Compl. ii 10. Upon information and belief, its principal place of business is located in Houston, Texas. It can be served with process through its registered agent, CT Corporation System, 1999 Bryan St., Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201-3136. 9. Plaintiff Aetna Health Management, LLC is a Delaware company with its principal place of business in Hartford, Connecticut. Compl. 1i 9. On information and belief, Aetna Health Management, member is Aetna Health Holdings, LLC, whose member is Aetna, Inc. Case 2:18-cv-02217-WB Document 1 Filed 05/25/18 Page 4 of 7 10. Plaintiff Aetna Life Insurance Company is a managed care corporation organized under the laws of Connecticut. Compl. 11 8. On information and belief, its principal place of business is located in Hartford, Connecticut. 1 1. Defendants are all Florida corporations whose principal place of business is in Sunrise, Florida. Compl. 11~13. 12. Because Plaintiffs are citizens of states other than Florida and Defendants are citizens of Florida, complete diversity exists among the parties to this action. B. The Amount in Controversy Exceeds $75,000 13. The amount in controversy requirement of 28 U.S.C. 1332 is also satis?ed. Where federal jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship, the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. See 28 U.S.C. 1332(a). While Defendants deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to any relief, monetary or otherwise, Plaintiffs seek ?[a]ctual damages in excess of $50,000,000 exclusive of interest and costs,? as well as punitive damages and attorneys? fees. Compl. 64, 69, 73, 79, 82. This alleged amount is clearly in excess of the $75,000 threshold. C. All Other Removal Requirements Are Satisfied 14. This Notice of Removal is timely ?led. A defendant has thirty (30) days from the date it was formally served with an ?initial pleading setting forth the claim for relief upon which such action or proceeding is based? to ?le a notice of removal. 28 U.S.C. 1446(b)(l); see also Murphy Bros, Inc. v. Michetti Pipe Stringing, Inc, 526 US. 344, 347-48, 354 (1999); Morrissey v. State Farm Fire Cas. Ca, Civil Action No. 14-05193, 2014 WL 5780949, at (E.D. Pa. Nov. 6, 2014). Defendants received the Complaint through formal service on May 8, 2018. Because Defendants are ?ling this Notice of Removal on May 25, 2018?within thirty days?? removal is timely. Case 2:18-cv-02217-WB Document 1 Filed 05/25/18 Page 5 of 7 15. Additionally, all Defendants consent to removal. For purposes of removal based on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a) and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1446(b), all defendants who have been properly joined and served must consent. All Defendants to this action?MEDNAX, PMI, and MSI?were properly joined and served, and they all consent to removal. 16. Finally, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1446(d), Defendants are ?ling written notice of this removal and a copy of the Notice of Removal with the Prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas and will serve a copy of this Notice of Removal, and its attachments, on all parties to the removed action. A copy of theNotice of Filing of Notice of Removal, as being submitted to the Court of Common Pleas, is attached hereto as Exhibit C. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS 17. By ?ling this Notice of Removal, Defendants are not waiving any defense that may be available to them, and reserve all such defenses, including, but not limited to, service of process, the suf?ciency of process, jurisdiction, and venue. If any question arises as to the propriety of the removal to this Court, Defendants request the opportunity to present a brief and oral argument in support of their position that this case has been properly removed. CONCLUSION WHEREFORE, Defendants hereby remove this action from the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Case 2:18-cv-02217-WB Document 1 Filed 05/25/18 Page 6 of 7 Respectfully submitted, Dated: May 25, 2018 CONRAD PC Howard M. Klein (No. 33632) Robert N. Feltoon (No. 58197) Andrew K. Garden (No. 314708) Centre Square West Tower 1500 Market Street, Suite 3900 Philadelphia, PA 19102-2100 Ph: (215) 864-9600 Fax: (215) 864-9620 Email: hklein@cenradobrien,corn rfeltoon@eonradobrien.com agarden?lconradobriencom QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART SULLIVAN, LLP Luke Nilras?k Michael B. Carlinsl