Maradiaga v. United States, 679 F.3d 1286

Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Act provides a no-fault plan for birth-related injuries with exclusive remedy, unless certain conditions apply.
Stanton and Audette, though federal employees, treated the infant; they were participating physicians under the plan, having paid assessments.
Plaintiffs filed a FTCA action against the United States for negligence arising from the Lakeland birth injuries.
District court dismissed, holding the FTCA could not reach injuries covered by the no-fault plan and noted immunity.
Plaintiffs moved for relief from judgment and to abate pending Florida administrative-law-judge determination; district court denied.
Court relies on Scheib to hold state-law immunities cannot expand the FTCA waiver.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Can the Florida Act expand FTCA immunity?	Maradiaga argues Act immunizes all based on no-fault plan participation.	United States contends Act cannot expand FTCA liability beyond private analogs.	FTCA immunity cannot be expanded by state law.
Is abatement required pending ALJ determination?	Plaintiffs seek abatement until compensability is decided.	US argues waiver/abandonment and state-law abatement not mandated here.	Plaintiffs waived right to abatement; district court did not err.

Scheib v. Florida Sanitarium & Benevolent Ass'n, 759 F.2d 857 (11th Cir. 1985) (state-law immunities cannot expand FTCA waiver)
United States v. Olson, 546 U.S. 43 (U.S. 2005) (FTCA liability limited to private analogs)
Douglas Asphalt Co. v. QORE, Inc., 657 F.3d 1146 (11th Cir. 2011) (arguments not raised in district court are forfeited)
Cont'l Tech. Servs., Inc. v. Rockwell Int'l Corp., 927 F.2d 1198 (11th Cir. 1991) (courts not required to search state law for undirected arguments)
Brannan, 562 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 2009) (invitation of ruling forfeits appeal arguments)