Case Explained: ESTATE OF BIBI AHMAD V. UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Filed: 2026-07-14

Docket: 8:23-cv-02303-MRA-DFM

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of the Estate of Bibi Ahmad’s putative class action alleging that UnitedHealth Group and UnitedHealthcare deceptively marketed Medicare Advantage plans. The court held that the plaintiffs’ state law claims are expressly preempted by the Medicare Act’s Part C preemption provision, 42 U.S.C. § 1395w-26(b)(3). Under this standard, federal standards established for Medicare Advantage plans supersede any state law duty that imposes obligations on such plans regarding the same subject matter, including marketing and communications. The court reasoned that because the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) extensively prescribes duties for Medicare Advantage plans and their affiliates regarding plan-related marketing, the existence of these federal standards preempts parallel or supplementary state law claims regardless of whether the defendants are direct plan organizations. Additionally, the court found no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of leave to amend the complaint, determining that any proposed amendment would be futile given the binding precedent established in *Uhm v. Humana, Inc.* and the applicability of Part C preemption to derivative claims against marketing affiliates. As a result, the dismissal stands and the case is closed without further proceedings on the merits.

Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.