their administrative remedies with respect to payment denials. (Def.'s Mem. at 11.) Because the subrogation claim will be dismissed, this issue is moot. 7 . The Supreme Court has held that the Boren Amendment to the Medicaid statute creates a federal right that is enforceable by health c'are providers against a state under § 1983. Wilder, 496 U.S. at 524, 110 S.Ct. 2510 (concluding that health care providers had an enforceable federal right under § 1983 to reasonable and adequate Medicaid rates in their state plans). A number of other courts have also found that portions of the Medicaid statute are enforceable under § 1983 against state officials. See Ohio Hospital Ass’n, 579 N.E.2d at 698-99; Amisub (PSL), Inc. v. Colorado Dep’t of Social Servs., 879 F.2d 789, 793-94 (10th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>); Westside Mothers v. Haveman, 289 F.3d 852,
holding federal regulations have the force of law and may create enforceable rights holding that title xix providers have federal rights enforceable in a  1983 action holding that 42 usc  1396aa13a which requires states to make reasonable reimbursement to providers was enforceable by the providers pursuant to section 1983 holding that because federal regulations have the force of law they may create enforceable rights under  1983 holding that boren amendment created substantive federal right enforceable by health care providers to reasonable and adequate rates