UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

August Term, 2023

Argued: January 11, 2024 Decided: October 24, 2024

Docket Nos. 22-1318-cv, 22-1362-cv, 22-1386-cv

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY,

Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross-Appellants,

— v. —

TRI-BOROUGH NY MEDICAL PRACTICE P.C., METRO PAIN SPECIALISTS P.C., LEONID SHAPIRO, M.D., REUVEN ALON, AKA ROB ALON, COLUMBUS IMAGING CENTER LLC, MEDAID RADIOLOGY LLC, YAN MOSHE, AKA YAN LEVIEV, HACKENSACK SPECIALTY ASC LLC, FKA DYNAMIC SURGERY CENTER LLC, INTEGRATED SPECIALTY ASC LLC, FKA HEALTHPLUS SURGERY CENTER LLC,

Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees.1

1 The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to amend the caption as set forth above. B e f o r e:

KEARSE, LYNCH, and NARDINI, Circuit Judges.

Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees, who are health care providers and related individuals and entities that treat automobile accident victims, appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Brodie, Ch. J.) granting in part a motion for a preliminary injunction made by Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross-Appellants State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company (collectively, “State Farm”). This appeal concerns benefits provided under New York’s Comprehensive Motor Vehicle Insurance Reparations Act (“No-Fault Act”) to reimburse covered individuals injured in automobile accidents for necessary health expenses, without regard to fault. State Farm alleges that Defendants engaged in a scheme to fraudulently obtain No-Fault benefits and pursued baseless arbitrations and state-court proceedings to seek reimbursement of unpaid bills. The district court granted the motion for a preliminary injunction in part by enjoining Defendants from proceeding with the pending arbitrations and from initiating new arbitrations and state-court proceedings, but denied an injunction of the pending state-court proceedings. In resolving this appeal, we address four key issues: (1) our appellate jurisdiction; (2) the propriety of the preliminary injunction; (3) whether the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., allows enjoining the arbitrations; and (4) whether an exception to the Anti- Injunction Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2283, allows enjoining the pending state-court proceedings. We REVERSE the district court’s orders denying a preliminary injunction of the pending state-court proceedings, AFFIRM its orders in all other respects, and REMAND the matter for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

ROBERT T. SMITH, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Washington, DC (Mary C. Fleming, Ally Jordan, Katten Muchin

2 Rosenman LLP, Washington, DC; Jonathan L. Marks, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Chicago, IL; Christopher T. Cook, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, New York, NY, on the brief), for Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross- Appellants.

PETER STROILI (Kevin Joseph Windels, Matthew Lee, on the brief), Kauffman Dolowich & Voluck LLP, New York, NY, for Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees Tri-Borough NY Medical Practice P.C., Metro Pain Specialists P.C., and Leonid Shapiro, M.D.

KEITH J. ROBERTS, Brach Eichler LLC, Roseland, NJ (Charles H. Horn, The Russell Friedman Law Group, LLP, Garden