Geisinger Community Medical Center v. Burwell
73 F. Supp. 3d 507
M.D. Penn.2014Background
- Geisinger challenged 42 C.F.R. § 412.230(a)(5)(iii), which bars Board reclassification after Section 401 rural redesignation for a year; Geisinger seeks Board eligibility under Section 1395ww(d)(10) as if rural; CMS redesignation as rural and Rural Reference Center (RRC) status granted in 2014; Geisinger applied to Board for wage-index reclassification to Allentown and East Stroudsburg; District Court considers summary judgment motions and holds jurisdiction to review the Secretary's regulation; court applies Chevron analysis and upholds the regulation; Board decisions were not yet rendered, so challenge is to the regulation itself; the court assigns cross-motions and combines overlapping statements of material facts; final order grants defendants’ summary judgment and denies plaintiff’s.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court has subject-matter jurisdiction to review the regulation | Geisinger contends review of the regulation is permitted; seeks challenge to rulemaking, not Board denial | Regulation precludes judicial review of final Board decisions | Court has jurisdiction to review the regulation |
| Whether 42 C.F.R. § 412.230(a)(5)(iii) is a permissible Chevron Step Two interpretation | Secretary’s interpretation improper; disregards Section 401 terms | Regulation is a reasonable construction to avoid inconsistent reclassifications | Court upholds regulation under Chevron Step Two |
| Whether the Secretary’s regulation is arbitrary or capricious or supported by rational policy | Regulation inadequately justifies denying Section 401 hospitals Board access | Regulation rationally prevents ineligible reclassifications and prevents improper reimbursements | Regulation not arbitrary or capricious; upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Bowen v. Michigan Acad. of Family Physicians, 476 U.S. 667 (1986) (judicial review of agency instructions; preclusion of some challenges)
- ParkView Med. Assocs. v. Shalala, 158 F.3d 146 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (challenge to governing rules; review of regulations governing determinations)
- Universal Health Servs. v. Sullivan, 770 F. Supp. 704 (D.D.C. 1991) (review of guidelines used by Board and Secretary; not precluded by statute)
- Kucana v. Holder, 558 U.S. 233 (2010) (preclusion of judicial review analyzed with statutory language and structure)
- Lawrence & Memorial Hosp. v. Sebelius, 986 F. Supp. 2d 124 (D.D.C. 2013) (discussion of Chevron Step One and legislative history relevance)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment burden-shifting and burden on movant)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (genuine issue of material fact; standard for summary judgment)