In Lima v. Vouis (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 242, the Department impliedly argued it would be responsible for all or a substantial portion of the plaintiff's future medical expenses. (Lima, supra, 174 Cal.App.4th pp. 261-262.) The Lima court stated: "The Department's contention in this regard is unsupported by authority; Arkansas Dept. of Health and Human Servs. v. Ahlborn (2006) supra, 547 U.S. 268, does not squarely address the issue, but appears to assume that the lien rights under discussion there related to amounts actually paid by the state agency on the Medicaid recipient's behalf. Even assuming, however, that the Department's contention concerning future medical expenses has arguable legal merit, it lacks factual support. The record contains no evidence on the issue of the Department's responsibility for future medical expenses, much less a commitment by the Department to pay such expenses, and the trial court made no findings on the issue. Thus, regardless of its legal merit, we reject the contention concerning future medical expenses because of the lack of factual support. We do not reach the issue of whether the Department could theoretically impose a valid lien on medical expenses it may be required to pay in the future." (Id. at p. 262.)