42 U.S.C. § 1395ii
Application of certain provisions of subchapter II
The provisions of sections 406 and 416(j) of this title, and of subsections (a), (d), (e), (h), (i), (j), (k), and (l) of section 405 of this title, shall also apply with respect to this subchapter to the same extent as they are applicable with respect to subchapter II, except that, in applying such provisions with respect to this subchapter, any reference therein to the Commissioner of Social Security or the Social Security Administration shall be considered a reference to the Secretary or the Department of Health and Human Services, respectively.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 255
cases (60 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case: Shalala v. Illinois Council on Long Term Care, Inc., 529 U.S. 1 (2000).
Shalala v. Illinois Council on Long Term Care, Inc., 529 U.S. 1 (2000). “See 42 U. S. C. § 1395ii (incorporating into the Medicare Act 42 U.”
Heckler v. Ringer, 466 U.S. 602 (1984). “We disagree in particular with its apparent conclusion that simply because a claim somehow can be construed as "procedural," it is cognizable in federal district court by way of federal-question jurisdiction.”
Bowen v. Michigan Academy of Fam. Physicians, 476 U.S. 667 (1986). “Second, the Government asserts that 42 U. S. C. §1395ii (1982 ed., '-Supp. II), which makes applicable 42 U.”
Florida Agency for Health Care Admin. v. Bayou Shores SNF, LLC (In Re Bayou Shores SNF, LLC), 828 F.3d 1297 (11th Cir. 2016). “§ 405 (h), made applicable to the Medicare Act by 42 U.S.C. § 1395ii, provides that § 405(g), to the exclusion of 28 U.”
Laura Wilson, Pers. Rep. of the Est. of Max Wilson, Deceased v. United States, 405 F.3d 1002 (Fed. Cir. 2005). “§ 405 (g), which is made applicable to the Medicare Act by 42 U.S.C. § 1395ii 6 and which provides, in relevant part, as follows: *1007 (g) Judicial review Any individual, after any final decision of the [Secretary] made after a hearing to which he was a party, irrespective of…”
Fam. Rehab., Inc. v. Azar, 886 F.3d 496 (5th Cir. 2018). “3d at 653 (holding that 42 U.S.C. § 1395ii"makes Section 405(h) applicable to Medicare").”
Alvarado Hosp., LLC v. Cochran, 868 F.3d 983 (Fed. Cir. 2017). “42 U.S.C. § 1395ii (incorporating 42 U.S.”
Am. Hosp. Ass'n v. Azar, 895 F.3d 822 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “" In pertinent part, it permits any person to file a civil action, "after any final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security made after a hearing to which he was a party," to "obtain a review of such decision" in federal district court.”
Nat'l Ass'n of Home Health Agencies v. Richard S. Schweiker, 690 F.2d 932 (D.C. Cir. 1982). “The district court dismissed Appellees’ Due Process claim because it was an attack on the Secretary’s future determination of “reasonable costs” and not on the administrative instruction being challenged and because it was based on the “speculative” possibility that Appellees…”
Adams Nursing Home of Williamstown, Inc. v. F. David Mathews, Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 548 F.2d 1077 (1st Cir. 1977). “In his jurisdictional argument, the Secretary claims that he is shielded from judicial intervention by 42 U.S.C. § 1395ii, which incorporates 42 U.”
Akebia Therapeutics, Inc. v. Azar, 976 F.3d 86 (1st Cir. 2020). “See 42 U.S.C. § 1395ii (incorporating id. § 405(h)).”
Temple Univ. Hosp. v. Sec'y United States Dept, 2 F.4th 121 (3d Cir. 2021). “§ 405 (h), as incorporated into the Medicare Act by 42 U.S.C. § 1395ii, removes from the federal courts any jurisdiction over claims arising under the Medicare Act for reimbursement, except to the extent allowed in 42 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.