Calabrese v. United States Department of Health & Human Services

446 F. App'x 38
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 27, 2011
Docket10-56351
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 446 F. App'x 38 (Calabrese v. United States Department of Health & Human Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Calabrese v. United States Department of Health & Human Services, 446 F. App'x 38 (9th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

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, 128 S.Ct. 2146, 170 L.Ed.2d 975 (2008) (addressing “class of one” equal protection claim); Weinberger v. Salfi, 422 U.S. 749, 769-70, 95 S.Ct. 2457, 45 L.Ed.2d 522 (1975) (addressing class-based equal protection claim).

Calabrese’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

***

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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Calabrese v. Sebelius
567 U.S. 917 (Supreme Court, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
446 F. App'x 38, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calabrese-v-united-states-department-of-health-human-services-ca9-2011.