United States Ninth Circuit

In a suit brought by various providers and beneficiaries of Medi-Cal against the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and the Director of the California Department of Health Care Services, claiming that the reimbursement rate reductions do not comply with 42 U.S.C. section 1396a(a)(30)(A), district court's grant of preliminary injunctions in favor of the plaintiffs is reversed and vacated where: 1) Orthopaedic Hosp. did not control because it did not consider the Secretary's interpretation of section 1396a(a)(30)(A); 2) the Secretary's approval of California's requested reimbursement rates, including her permissible view that prior to reducing the rates states need not follow any specific procedural steps, was entitled to Chevron deference, and the Secretary's approval complied with the Administrative Procedures Act; 3) plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed on the merits of their Supremacy Claus claims against the Director because the Secretary had reasonably determined that the state's reimbursement rates complied with section 1396a(a)(30)(A); and 4) none of the plaintiffs had a viable takings claim because Medicaid, as a voluntary program, does not create property rights.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/13/2012
• Published 12/13/2012

Judges

• Trott

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel