• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Donate Now
  • Sign Up

Center for Medicare Advocacy

Advancing Access to Medicare and Healthcare

  • Eligibility/Enrollment
  • Coverage/Appeals
    • Medicare Costs (2020 & 2021)
    • Self Help Materials – Toolkits & More
  • Topics
    • Basic Introduction to Medicare
    • COVID-19 and Medicare
    • Medicare Costs (2020 & 2021)
    • Home Health Care
    • Improvement Standard and Jimmo News
    • Nursing Home / Skilled Nursing Facility Care
    • Outpatient Observation Status
    • Part B
    • Part D / Prescription Drug Benefits
    • Medicare for People Under 65
    • Medicare “Reform”
    • All Other Topics
    • Resources
      • Infographics
  • Publications
    • CMA Alerts
    • Fact Sheets & Issue Briefs
    • Infographics
    • The Medicare Handbook
    • SNF Enforcement Newsletter
    • Elder Justice Newsletter
    • Medicare Facts & Fiction
    • Articles by Topic
  • Litigation
    • Litigation News
    • Cases
    • Litigation Archive
    • Amicus Curiae Activities
  • Newsroom
    • Press Releases
    • Editorials & Letters to the Editor
    • CMA Comments, Responses, and Letters
    • Medicare Facts & Fiction
    • CMA in the News
  • About Us
    • Mission Statement
    • CMA FAQs
    • Personnel & Boards
    • The Center for Medicare Advocacy Founder’s Circle
    • Connecticut Dually Eligible Appeals Project
    • Ossen Medicare Outreach, Education and Advocacy Project
    • National Medicare Advocates Alliance
    • National Voices of Medicare Summit
    • CMA Webinars
    • Products & Services
    • Testimonials
    • Career, Fellowship & Internship Opportunities
    • Contact Us
  • Support Our Work
    • Donate Now
    • Join the Center for Medicare Advocacy Founder’s Circle
    • Take Action
    • Share Your Health Care Story
    • Tell Congress to Protect Our Care
    • Listen to Medicare & Health Care Stories
    • Sign Up

Webber v. McClellan

April 5, 2007

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

No. CV05-4219-PHX-NVW (D.Ariz.), filed December 22, 2005

Updated: April 5, 2007

Issue: Whether regulations issued by CMS on March 8, 2005, which, inter alia, establish a new cadre of ALJs to handle only Medicare claims and which make it virtually impossible to have an in-person hearing close to the claimant's residence (relying on telephone or videoteleconferencing hearings instead) violate the Medicare statute, (especially the Medicare Modernization Act), the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), and the Due Process Clause.

Relief sought: A nationwide class is alleged.  Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to bring the new ALJ system into compliance with the statutes, the APA, and the guarantees of due process, including, inter alia, that claimants have fair and reasonable access to in-person hearings near their place of residence.

Status: The complaint was filed on December 22, 2005.  Plaintiffs later filed an amended complaint, adding several new plaintiffs.  The defendants moved to dismiss on several grounds, including lack of standing and failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

On September 26, 2006, the court issued an order in which it granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss.  Upon both sides filing motions for reconsideration, the judge, on February 8, 2007, ruled in the Secretary's favor and dismissed the complaint. He held that plaintiff Webber's claim was moot and that the venue portion of 42 U.S.C. section 405(g) required that at least one named plaintiff have the proper venue. Since plaintiff Webber was the only Arizona plaintiff, and her claim had been dismissed, the case should be dismissed, as the only remaining plaintiff with standing was not an Arizona resident.  Plaintiffs are not appealing.

Filed Under: Article Tagged With: Archived Cases, Litigation

Primary Sidebar

Easy Access to Understanding Medicare

The Center for Medicare Advocacy produces a range of informative materials on Medicare-related topics. Check them out:

  • Medicare Basics
  • CMA Alerts
  • CMA Webinars
  • Connecticut Info & Projects
  • Health Care Stories
  • Se habla Español

Sign Up for CMA Alerts

Jimmo v. Sebelius

Medicare covers skilled care to maintain or slow decline as well as to improve.

Improvement Isn’t Required. It’s the law!

Read more.

Latest Tweets

  • Our statement with @CANHR_CA and the Michigan Elder Justice Initiative recommends key issues of the Nursing Home Re… https://t.co/9nSwt3tAwT, Jan 15
@CMAorg

Footer

Stay Connected:

  • Contact Us
  • Sitemap
  • Products & Services
  • Copyright/Privacy

© 2021 · Center for Medicare Advocacy