Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Public Health – Medicare — appeal

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//January 22, 2013//

Public Health – Medicare — appeal

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//January 22, 2013//

Listen to this article

U.S. Supreme Court

Civil

Public Health – Medicare — appeal

The 180-day limitation in 42 U.S.C. 1395oo(a)(3) to appeal to the Provider Reimbursement Review Board is not jurisdictional.

Unless Congress has “clearly state[d]” that a statutory limitation is jurisdictional, the restriction should be treated “as nonjurisdictional.” Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U. S. 500–516. “[C]ontext, including this Court’s interpretations of similar provisions in many years past,” is probative of whether Congress intended a particular provision to rank as jurisdictional. Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick, 559 U. S. ___, ___. If §1395oo(a)(3) were jurisdictional, the 180-day time limit could not be enlarged by agency or court.

Section 1395oo(a)(3) hardly reveals a design to preclude any regulatory extension. The provision instructs that a provider “may obtain a hearing” by filing “a request . . . within 180 days after notice of the intermediary’s final determination.” It “does not speak in jurisdictional terms.” Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 455 U. S. 385. This Court has repeatedly held that filing deadlines ordinarily are not jurisdictional; indeed, they have been described as “quintessential claim-processing rules.” Henderson v. Shinseki, 562 U. S. ___, ___.

642 F. 3d 1145, reversed and remanded.

11-1231 Sebelius v. Auburn Regional Medical Center

Ginsburg, J.; Sotomayor, J., concurring.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests