From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Calabrese v. U.S. Dept. of H. Human Ser.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 27, 2011
446 F. App'x 1 (9th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 10-56352.

Submitted July 12, 2011.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, plaintiffs' request for oral argument is denied.

July 27, 2011.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Cormac J. Carney, District Judge, Presiding D.C. No. 8:07-cv-01444-CJC-RNB.

Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Dorothy Calabrese, M.D., and her patient Paul Messer, appeal pro se from the district court's order dismissing their action alleging that Medicare contractor National Heritage Insurance Company and its medical director, Dr. Quinn, made false statements and engaged in fraudulent conduct in connection with plaintiffs' claims for Medicare reimbursements. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Uhm v. Humana, Inc., 620 F.3d 1134, 1139-40 (9th Cir. 2010), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action because, to the extent that plaintiffs exhausted their administrative remedies, they failed to state a claim for relief. See Orkin v. Taylor, 487 F.3d 734, 738-39 (9th Cir. 2007); Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467, 1482 (9th Cir. 1997), aff'd, 525 U.S. 299 (1999).

Plaintiffs' remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Calabrese v. U.S. Dept. of H. Human Ser.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 27, 2011
446 F. App'x 1 (9th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

Calabrese v. U.S. Dept. of H. Human Ser.

Case Details

Full title:DOROTHY CALABRESE, M.D.; PAUL MESSER, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. U.S…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 27, 2011

Citations

446 F. App'x 1 (9th Cir. 2011)