|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|11-1231||D.C. Cir.||Dec 4, 2012||Jan 22, 2013||9-0||Ginsburg||OT 2012|
Holding: The 180-day statutory time limit for a hospital to appeal a final Medicare reimbursement is not “jurisdictional,” but it is also not subject to equitable tolling.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Ginsburg on January 22, 2013. Justice Sotomayor wrote a concurring opinion.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 9 2012||Application (11A864) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 19, 2012 to April 18, 2012, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Mar 13 2012||Application (11A864) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until April 13, 2012.|
|Apr 13 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 14, 2012)|
|May 14 2012||Brief of respondent Auburn Regional Medical Center, et al. in opposition filed.|
|May 29 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 14, 2012.|
|May 30 2012||Reply of petitioner Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 18 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 21, 2012.|
|Jun 25 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jul 23 2012||John F. Manning, Esquire, of Cambridge, Massachusetts, is invited to brief and argue this case, as amicus curiae, in support of the position that the 180-day statutory time limit for filing an appeal with the Provider Reimbursement Review Board from a final Medicare payment determination made by a fiscal intermediary, 42 U. S. C. §1395oo(a)(3), may not be extended for any period.|
|Aug 3 2012||The brief of the Court-appointed amicus curiae is to be filed on or before August 31, 2012.|
|Aug 3 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 11, 2012.|
|Aug 3 2012||The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including October 16, 2012.|
|Aug 31 2012||Brief of Court-Appointed amicus curiae filed.|
|Sep 11 2012||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs received.)|
|Sep 11 2012||Brief of petitioner Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services filed.|
|Sep 14 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, December 4, 2012.|
|Sep 14 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Professor Scott Dodson in support of neither party filed.|
|Oct 3 2012||Record received from U.S.C.A. for District f Columbia Circuit. (1 box)|
|Oct 5 2012||Record from U.S.D.C. for the District of Columbia is electronic.|
|Oct 16 2012||Brief of respondents Auburn Regional Medical Center, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 17 2012||CIRCULATED.|
|Oct 19 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Tax Clinic filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 23 2012||Brief amicus curiae of American Hospital Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 23 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Southwest Consulting Associates, LP filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 23 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Quality Reimbursement Services, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 23 2012||Motion of Court-Appointed amicus curiae for divided argument filed.|
|Nov 13 2012||Motion of Court-Appointed amicus curiae for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Nov 15 2012||Reply of petitioner Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 15 2012||Reply of Court-Appointed amicus curiae filed. (Distributed)|
|Dec 4 2012||Argued. For petitioner: Edwin S. Kneedler, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For Court-Appointed amicus curiae: John F. Manning, Cambridge, Mass. (Appointed by this Court.) For respondent: Robert L. Roth, Washington, D. C.|
|Jan 22 2013||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Sotomayor, J., filed a concurring opinion.|
|Feb 25 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
|Apr 2 2013||Record returned to U.S.C.A. for District of Columbia Circuit.|
JUST IN: The Supreme Court agrees to take up five new cases, including an appeal from a high school football coach who lost his job after he prayed on the field.
#SCOTUS will have more opinions next Thursday at 10 am.
A workplace vaccine-or-test requirement that would have covered 84 million workers -- blocked. A vaccine mandate for over 10 million health care workers -- allowed to take effect.
Full analysis from @AHoweBlogger on this afternoon's rulings:
Fractured court blocks vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces but green-lights vaccine mandate for health care workers - SCOTUSblog
With COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations reaching a new record high as a result of the Omicron variant, the Suprem...
Here's a two-minute explainer from @katieleebarlow, SCOTUSblog's TikTokker-in-residence, on the pair of vaccine decisions the court just handed down.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court BLOCKS the federal government's COVID-19 vaccine-or-test requirement for large workplaces. The court ALLOWS a vaccine mandate for workers at federally funded health care facilities to take effect nationwide.
SCOTUS releases just one opinion today: an 8-1 decision on an arcane question of pension payments for "dual-status military technicians." The court rules in favor of the government's statutory interpretation and against the technicians. Barrett has the opinion; Gorsuch dissents.