131118P.pdf   10/06/2014  Annex Medical, Inc.  v.  Kathleen Sebelius
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-1118
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Colloton and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Religious Freedom Restoration Act. In this Religious Freedom 
   Restoration Act case challenging the U.S. Department of Health and Human 
   Services' contraceptive mandate under 42 U.S.C. Section 2000bb-1(a), 
   plaintiff Janas did not join in the preliminary injunction motion which 
   forms the basis for the appeal, and he is dismissed from the appeal as he 
   has no stake in its outcome; with respect of plaintiffs Annex and Lind, on 
   the basis of the record, the court can only speculate whether Annex's 
   difficulties in obtaining contraceptive-free insurance are: (1) caused by 
   the government defendants as opposed to the independent decisions of 
   third-party insurers and (2) redressable by the remedy available to Annex 
   - a permanent version of the preliminary injunction Annex already received 
   and which failed to redress its alleged injury; rather than speculate, the 
   court will vacate the district court's denial of Annex's motion for a 
   preliminary injunction and remand the matter for additional analysis, 
   beginning with the parties' Article III standing. Judge Colloton, 
   concurring in the judgment. 
  
131118P.pdf   09/05/2014  Annex Medical, Inc.  v.  Kathleen Sebelius
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-1118
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Colloton and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Religious Freedom Restoration Act - Affordable Health Care 
   Act. In this appeal challenging the district court denial of a motion to 
   preliminarily enjoin the contraceptive mandate under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 
   2000bb-1(a), appellant Janus had no standing to appeal the order; 
   appellant Annex did not have a sufficient number of employees to be 
   required to offer any health insurance and the mandate did not apply to 
   it; the court could not determine on the basis of this record whether 
   Annex's and Lind's claimed injury - that independent third parties 
   (private health insurers not involved in the case) are unable to sell 
   Annex a health insurance plan that excludes healthcare inconsistent with 
   Lind's religious beliefs - could establish standing, and the matter is 
   remanded for further proceedings. Judge Colloton, concurring in the 
   judgment.