The complaint in this case properly alleged claims under the Insurance Fraud Protection Action (Ins. Code 1871 et seq.) and UCL.  It alleged that a unlicensed defendant, Mir, set up a supposed medical management firm that did not just manage the radiology labs, but referred patients at his discretion to them, directed what tests should be performed and by whom.  A for-profit corporation that is not wholly owned by licensed physicians may not practice medicine either directly or by hiring physicians to do so.  Referring patients for radiology services involves the practice of medicine.  Here, the complaint alleged that the non-physician defendants exercised too great a control over the provision of radiology services and so engaged in the unlicensed practice of medicine.  An insurance claim submitted by a firm engaged in the unlicensed practice of medicine is a false claim for purposes of the IFPA.  Because the complaint alleged an IFPA claim, it also alleged a UCL claim.