NEWARK (LN) — U.S. District Judge Susan D. Wigenton on Thursday denied a motion for reconsideration class action Williams v. United States of America, rejecting the plaintiff's argument that a defendant's August 2025 policy change constituted new evidence warranting class certification.
Wigenton, who had previously denied class certification in a January 2026 opinion, ruled that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the policy change was unavailable of the original hearing. The August 2025 policy change, which affects reimbursements for future deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap surgeries, was announced well before the January 28 ruling.
"Simply put, the policy change is inapplicable to Plaintiff's claims," Wigenton wrote.
Even if the policy change were considered new evidence, Wigenton found it would not have altered the disposition of the case. The court had declined to certify the class due to substantial variation in plan language that dictates the standard of review for each member's claim. The new policy would still require individualized inquiries to determine which plans reserve discretion and how far that discretion extends.
The plaintiff also argued that Wigenton misapplied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(2) and improperly applied a predominance inquiry in determining that commonality did not exist. Wigenton rejected this argument, finding no error in her application of the rule.
The plaintiff has already appealed the court's decision on the issue of commonality, which will be addressed in due course.
The motion for reconsideration is an "extremely limited procedural vehicle" that is to be granted "very sparingly," Wigenton noted, citing Third Circuit precedent.