Last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgement against an employee-whistleblower who had claimed that her former employer retaliated against her in violation of the False Claims Act’s (FCA) whistleblower protection provision. Lam v. Springs Window Fashions, LLC, 37 F.4th 431 (7th Cir. 2022). The court held that her
An Ohio Court of Appeals recently weighed in on the proper protocols one must take in order to successfully assert one’s Fifth Amendment Constitutional Right against self-incrimination in relation to a discovery request in a civil case that may have incriminating affects in an ongoing anti-kickback statute (AKS) investigation. The Fifth Amendment of the United
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services recently announced an opportunity for public comment on its voluntary self-referral disclosure protocol (SRDP). The voluntary SRDP is a way to resolve technical violations under the physician self-referral law (commonly known as the Stark Law) by submitting information to CMS about prohibited conduct. During this period, CMS is
The Supreme Court (Court) will soon decide whether to take up a critical (and long-running) issue concerning applicability of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) pleading standards in False Claim Act (FCA) suits. To satisfy Rule 9(b)’s particularity requirement for fraud allegations, FCA plaintiffs generally have needed to detail specific false claims submitted by defendants.
On April 22, 2022, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a favorable advisory opinion (no. 22-08) (the “Advisory Opinion”) approving a healthcare organization loaning smartphones to promote telehealth care that it provides to underserved populations. The Advisory Opinion provides context for healthcare organizations that may similarly want
On April 20, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General issued a favorable advisory opinion regarding physician ownership of a medical device company that manufactures products ordered by the physician owners and other affiliated physicians.
Read our alert to learn more about the opinion, which offers a path forward for
In February 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California denied a defendant’s motion to dismiss a qui tam action alleging that the defendant had violated the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS). In its ruling, the court noted that “even some fair-market value payments will qualify as illegal kickbacks.”
Click here to read
The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland recently weighed in on the appropriate causation standard when evaluating whether a claim “result[s] from” a violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute sufficient to constitute a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act. In U.S. ex rel. Fitzer v. Allergan, Inc., the court
In Conte v. Kingston NH Operations LLC, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21686, *1, 2022 WL 356753, a New York District court granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss an employee’s false claims allegations under the False Claims Act (the “FCA”) and the New York False Claims Act (the “NYFCA”). The case stemmed from allegedly improper patient
Last month, the Central District of California granted the government’s affirmative motion for partial summary judgment in U.S. v. Reliance Medical Sys., 2022 WL 524062 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 2022). The Reliance Medical case involved an FCA action based on a theory that certain physician-owned distributorships (PODs) violated the Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS). As detailed below,
