Case ID: f-appx_446/html/0001-01.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.; Paul Messer, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Kathleen SEBELIUS, Secretary, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 10-56352.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 12, 2011.
    
    July 27, 2011.
    Dorothy Calabrese, M.D., San Clemente, CA, pro se.
    Paul Messer, Irvine, CA, pro se.
    Russell William Chittenden, Esquire, Assistant U.S., 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, Michael O. Leavitt, 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, plaintiffs’ request for oral argument is denied.
    
   MEMORANDUM

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, 119 S.Ct. 710, 142 L.Ed.2d 753 (1999).

Plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

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