Key legal question
Whether the federal appeal complied with the statutory requirements of motivation and conclusions under Art. 42 LTF.
Extracted holding
It did not; the filing failed to explain sufficiently why the cantonal judgment was unlawful or why the findings were manifestly incorrect.
Extracted reasoning
The appellant repeated the substantive position but did not address the decisive issue of uninterrupted insurance coverage communication, nor did he show any legal error or arbitrariness.