MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff LI Neuroscience Specialists (“plaintiff” or “LI Neuroscience”) filed this action against defendant Blue Cross Blue Shield of Florida (“defendant” or “BCBS”), seeking the full amount of its billed charges for medical care provided to a beneficiary of defendant, Barton W. (“the patient”), alleging that it is entitled to recover this amount because the patient transferred all of his rights to benefit payments under his insurance plan, as well as all related rights under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), to plaintiff. Presently before the Court is defendant’s motion to dismiss the Complaint, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on the following grounds: (1) plaintiff lacks standing to pursue this claim under ERISA because the assignment of benefits was invalid; and (2) plaintiff fails to state a claim under ERISA for any relief. For the reasons set forth below, the motion to dismiss is granted.In particular, the Court dismisses the Complaint because the Court finds that the unambiguous anti-assignment provision in the Plan document nullified any purported assignment of the patient’s benefits to plaintiff and because plaintiff does not seek equitable relief such that a claim for breach of fiduciary duty under ERISA would be proper. However, because plaintiff asserted at oral argument that it is considering pursuing an alternative standing argument using a power of attorney theory, the Court will conduct a status conference to determine whether plaintiff wishes to seek leave to re-plead in light of the Court’s decision.I. BACKGROUNDA. The Complaint1According to the Complaint, plaintiff provided emergency medical services to the patient on August 16, 2013, the value of which was $214,925. (Compl.
3-6, 8.) The patient was a beneficiary of defendant’s health care plan and policies (“the Plan”). (Id.2.) Plaintiff asserts that the patient transferred all of his rights under his insurance plan and all of his related rights under ERISA to plaintiff. (Id.7.) Plaintiff did not attach the alleged assignment to the Complaint or its opposition papers, nor do any of plaintiff’s filings specify the terms of the assignment.As the purported assignee of the benefits, plaintiff prepared Health Insurance Claim Forms demanding reimbursement in the amount of $214,925 for the emergency medical services rendered to the patient, and defendant subsequently issued reimbursement in the amount of $12,257.90 and indicated that an additional $850.54 was the patient’s coinsurance liability. (Id.
