his case and have its merits fairly judged.” Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 U.S. 422, 433, 102 S.Ct. 1148, 71 L.Ed.2d 265 (1982). This is where the claim founders. New Vision does not, because it cannot, complain that it was not afforded adequate process in the termination proceedings; the record plainly demonstrates that it was given the “full panoply of due process protections.” Sloan v. Dep’t of Hous. & Urban Dev., 231 F.3d 10, 19 (D.C.Cir.2000). New Vision had several opportunities to informally resolve its problems before termination, including a follow-up PCR after its initial failure, the ability to submit corrective policies to the agency, and the opportunity to present evidence to DHCF before termination. See Proposed Notice at 1; see also Patchogue, 797 F.2d at 1144 (<HOLDING>); see also GOS Operator, LLC v. Sebelius, 843
holding informal process is sufficient because medicaid providers are not entitled  under constitutional due process standards to a full administrative hearing prior to termination of their provider agreement holding that foreign states are not persons entitled to rights under the due process clause holding that an alien is entitled to the fifth amendment guarantee of due process which is satisfied by a full and fair hearing holding that district court may order hearing as remedy for termination of public employee without due process recognizing due process right to notice and informal hearing in school disciplinary process