2010 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

10-12-2010

Cooper Univ Hosp v. Secretary HHS

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 09-4095

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2010

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2010 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Cooper Univ Hosp v. Secretary HHS" (2010). 2010 Decisions. Paper 452.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2010/452
1 

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

____________ 

No. 09-4095 

____________ 

COOPER UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL 

 Appellant 

v. 

 KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, 

Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services 

 Pursuant to F.R.A.P. 43(c) 

____________ 

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 

(D.C. Civil No. 1-08-cv-03781) 

District Judge: Honorable Jerome B. Simandle 

____________ 

Argued: September 15, 2010 

____________ 

Before: SLOVITER, BARRY and SMITH, Circuit Judges

(Opinion Filed: October 12, 2010) 

____________ 

Mark H. Gallant, Esq. (Argued) 

Judy Wang Mayer, Esq. 

Cozen & O'Connor 

1900 Market Street 

3rd Floor 

Philadelphia, PA 19103-0000 
2 

 -andThomas McKay, III, Esq. 

Cozen & O'Connor 

457 Haddonfield Road 

Liberty View, Suite 300 

Cherry Hill, NJ 08002-0000 

Counsel for Appellant Cooper University Hospital

Anthony J. Steinmeyer, Esq. (Argued) 

August E. Flentje, Esq. 

United States Department of Justice 

Civil Division 

Room 7529 

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20530-0000 

 -andDavid L. Hoskins, Esq. 

Department of Health & Human Services 

Health Care Financing Division 

330 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Cohen Building 

Washington, DC 20201-0000 

 -andElizabeth A. Pascal, Esq. 

Office of the United States Attorney 

Camden Federal Building & Courthouse 

401 Market Street 

P.O. Box 2098, 4th Floor 

Camden, NJ 08101-0000 

Counsel for Appellee Kathleen Sebelius

Jeffrey A. Lovitky, Esq. 

Law Office of Jeffrey A. Lovitky 

1776 K. Street, N.W. 

Suite 800 

Washington, DC 20006 
3 

Counsel for Amicus-Appellant Quality Reimbursement Services 

____________ 

OPINION 

____________ 

BARRY, Circuit Judge

 Cooper University Hospital has appealed the grant of summary judgment in favor 

of Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, in 

this very complex and very important matter. The case before the Hon. Jerome B. 

Simandle, and now the appeal before us, involved the amount of Medicare 

reimbursement that Cooper University Hospital – a hospital in Camden, New Jersey, with 

a large low-income patient population – receives from the federal government for serving 

a disproportionate share of low-income patients. Resolution of the difficult legal issue 

presented required an analysis of the interaction between, and the intersection of, the 

Medicare and Medicaid statutes, described by a sister court as being “among the most 

completely impenetrable texts within human experience.” Rehab. Ass’n of Va., Inc. v. 

Kozlowski, 42 F.3d 1440, 1450 (4th Cir. 1994). Resolution of this issue will affect 

hospitals well beyond the one hospital party to this case. 

 We have carefully considered the record and the submissions of the parties, and 

have heard oral argument. We have paid particular attention to the patience and skill 

with which Judge Simandle has handled this case from its very inception until its 
4 

conclusion, when he rendered an Opinion that thoughtfully, thoroughly, and articulately 

decided what had to be decided. We could not do it better, and we will not try. Suffice it 

to say, substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Simandle’s excellent Opinion of 

September 28, 2009, we will affirm.