Documents in Federal Trade Commission v. Mount Sinai Hospitals Group, Inc.

Court documents in the archive for this case, each with the description the archive holds and a link to the original where there is one. Documents are listed by docket entry; an attachment sits under its entry, marked with the entry number and its own number (12-3 is the third attachment to entry 12). 4 documents.

Court documents
EntryDateDocumentPagesOpen
1MISCELLANEOUS CASE INITIATING DOCUMENT - MOTION to Compel Mount Sinai Hospitals Group, Inc. to Produce Documents in Response to Federal Subpoena. Other Court Name: United States District Court - Northern District of Texas. Other Court Case Number: 4:26-cv-00748-O. Document filed by Federal Trade Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Cohen, Jonathan) (Entered: 10/27/2026)Compel8View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external
1-1MISCELLANEOUS CASE INITIATING DOCUMENT - MOTION to Compel Mount Sinai Hospitals Group, Inc. to Produce Documents in Response to Federal Subpoena. Other Court Name: United States District Court - Northern District of Texas. Other Court Case Number: 4:26-cv-00748-O. Document filed by Federal Trade Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Cohen, Jonathan) (Entered: 10/27/2026)Exhibit A27View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external
2MISCELLANEOUS COVER SHEET filed..(Cohen, Jonathan) (Entered: 10/27/2026)Miscellaneous Cover Sheet2View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external
6ORDER denying 1 Letter Motion to Compel. The Court is in receipt of the FTC's letter motion, requesting a Rule 45 transfer or, alternatively, a pre-motion conference concerning their motion to compel compliance with a subpoena issued from th e U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. (Dkt. #1). The Court DENIES the FTC's Rule 45 transfer motion, without prejudice to its renewal. Rule 45(f) provides that "[w]hen the court where compliance is required did not issue the subpoena, it may transfer a motion under this rule to the issuing court if [i] the person subject to the subpoena consents or [ii] if the court finds exceptional circumstances. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(f) (emphasis added). It is ultimately "withi n the discretion of this Court... to [] decide whether to transfer a subpoena-related motion" under Rule 45(f). SBA Commc'ns Corp. v. Fractus, S.A., No. 19 Misc. 130 (ER), 2019 WL 4879333, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 3, 2019). The FTC's lette r does not state whether Mount Sinai Hospitals Group, Inc. ("Respondent") consents to the requested transfer. Nor are there any apparent "exceptional circumstances" warranting transfer to the Northern District of Texas. Absent con sent from the Respondent, the prime concern [in deciding a Rule 45(f) motion] should be avoiding burdens on local nonparties subject to subpoenas. Hilb Grp. of New York, LLC v. Associated Agencies, Inc., No. 23-MC-264 (LJL), 2023 WL 5183690, at *1 (S .D.N.Y. Aug. 10, 2023) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Advisory Committee's 2013 Note to Rule 45(f)). Here, the burdens weigh against transfer, as both Respondent and nonparty, the State of New York, are located within this Courts ju risdiction. The Court GRANTS the FTC's motion for a conference pursuant to Local Rule 37.2, and accepts the FTC's letter motion (Dkt. #1) as their opening brief. Respondent and the State of New York are invited to submit briefs in response to the FTC's letter motion, addressing: (i) whether Respondent's compliance with the subpoena would place Respondent in conflict with the New York Shield Law; and (ii) if there is a conflict, whether the Rules Enabling Act preempts any conf licting state law. Respondent shall also address: (iii) whether they consent to the FTC's transfer motion. Those briefs shall not exceed eight pages (excluding exhibits) and are due on or before November 30, 2026. On December 2, 2026, at 3:30 p. m., counsel for the FTC, Respondent, and for non-party the State of New York, shall appear for a conference with the Court in Courtroom 618, 40 Foley Square, New York, New York 10007. Separately, the FTC (correctly) observes that Respondent is obliga ted under New York law to make reasonable attempts to notify doctors, patients, and others under N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 394-I(2)(b)(ii) (the New York Shield Law). (Dkt. #1 at 5 n.24). The Court expects that Respondent will make reasonable attempt s to inform potentially impacted individuals of the existence of this litigation, to ensure that any potential intervenors can be heard prior to the hearing on December 2, 2026. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 1.. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 10/27/2026) (rro)Order on Motion to Compel10View here · Original(opens another site)PDF, external

4 documents