Case ID: f-appx_446/html/0038-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Dorothy CALABRESE, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. United States Department of Health And Human Services, Kathleen SEBELIUS, Secretary, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 10-56351.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 12, 2011.
    
    Filed July 27, 2011.
    Dorothy Calabrese, M.D., San Clemente, CA, pro se.
    Russell William Chittenden, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USLA-Office of The U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       Kathleen Sebelius is substituted for her predecessor, Charles E. Johnson, as Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services under Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).
    
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Ca-labrese’s request for oral argument is denied.
    
   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.