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

Full title: DOROTHY CALABRESE, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 27, 2011

No. 10-56351 (9th Cir. Jul. 27, 2011)

Opinion

No. 10-56351.

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, Calabrese's 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. 8:09-cv-00120-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., appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing her action alleging equal protection violations based on defendant's denial of Medicare reimbursements for patients with chemical sensitivity. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Uhm v. Humana, Inc., 620 F.3d 1134, 1139 (9th Cir. 2010), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action because Calabrese failed to state an equal protection claim. See Engquist v. Or. Dep't of Agric., 553 U.S. 591, 601-03 (2008) (addressing "class of one" equal protection claim); Weinberger v. Salfi, 422 U.S. 749, 769-70 (1975) (addressing class-based equal protection claim).

Calabrese's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.