ZIPPERER v. PREMERA BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF ALASKA (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

John D. Zipperer, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his diversity action alleging a violation of the Alaska Prompt Payment Statute. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Bagdadi v. Nazar, 84 F.3d 1194, 1197 (9th Cir. 1996). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058–59 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Zipperer’s Alaska Prompt Payment Statute claim because Zipperer failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendant failed to comply with the statute’s requirements given that defendants responded within 30 days. See Alaska Stat. § 21.36.495 (requiring health care insurer to either pay or deny a clean claim within 30 days of receiving it).

Denial of Zipperer’s request for declaratory relief was proper because Zipperer did not prevail on his claim under the Alaska Prompt Payment Statute. See Hoeck v. City of Portland, 57 F.3d 781, 787 (9th Cir. 1995).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Zipperer’s request for oral argument (Docket Entry No. 31) is denied.

AFFIRMED.