Opinion
Civil Action No. 92-cv-00870-EWN-OES, (Consolidated for all purposes with Civil Action No. 96-cv-343).
September 27, 2007
ORDER
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff class's motion to determine the legality of DOC's medical co-pay program (#2234). The court held a hearing on the motion September 14, 2007. Based on statements made in response to the court's questions, the court concluded that the motion might be mooted, at least temporarily, by the fact that DOC had agreed to suspend the program pending the court's ruling on Plaintiffs' motion. Defendants' counsel stated that she would inquire of DOC whether DOC wished to enforce the co-pay rules, irrespective of the court's issuance of a ruling.
On September 19, 2007, Defendants filed a statement concerning the co-pay rules (#2895). The statement describes new rules which DOC is promulgating with respect to diabetic prisoners who are members of the class. Based on statements made during the hearing, the court infers that such prisoners are the primary focus of Plaintiffs' motion. Defendants suggest that, in light of these new rules, there is no need for the court to issue a ruling. Although Plaintiffs have not filed a response, it appears to the court that the Defendants are correct. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the motion (#2234) is DENIED as having been mooted, at least temporarily, by the actions described in #2895. This denial is WITHOUT PREJUDICE to renewal of the motion if Defendants should change the rules again.