United States: Healthcare Law Update: December 2016

Nathan "Nate" A. Adams IV is a partner in our Tallahassee office.

Enforcement

Prompt Payment Discounts Not an Anti-Kickback Statute Violation

In United States of Am. et al. ex rel. Ruscher v. Omnicare, No. 15-20629, 2016 WL 6407128 (5th Cir. Oct. 28, 2016), the court of appeals affirmed summary judgment for Omnicare, the nation's largest provider of pharmacy services to long-term care facilities such as skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). Relator, who worked in Omnicare's collections department, filed a qui tam action on behalf of the United States and 22 states, alleging that Omnicare violated the False Claims Act (FCA) and state mini-FCAs by causing SNFs to make false claims for Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements that allegedly resulted in kickbacks in violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS). Relator had two primary kickback theories: 1) Omnicare did not collect Part A debt and 2) Omnicare offered prompt payment discounts (PPDs) to induce the SNFs to refer patients to Omnicare who were covered under Part D and Medicaid. The court ruled there was inadequate evidence of the first of these as opposed to non-confrontational efforts to collect verifiable debt and settle billing disputes. The court also ruled that PPDs are permissible. Relator also brought a reverse FCA claim by alleging that Omnicare violated an obligation to disclose a "reportable event" of Medicare fraud to the Office of the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) pursuant to a Corporate Integrity Agreement. The court disagreed that there was sufficient evidence that a reportable event occurred during the timeframe under review.

Qui Tam Action Alleging Fraud Dismissed for Lack of Particularity

In Lawton ex rel. United States of Am. v. Takeda Pharm. Co., Ltd., No. 16-1382, 2016 WL 6872652 (1st Cir. Nov. 22, 2016), the court affirmed dismissal of the relator's qui tam action, alleging with insufficient particularity that pharmaceutical companies conspired in a fraudulent marketing campaign that allegedly caused third parties to submit false reimbursement claims to government entities for off-label uses of proprietary treatment for Type 2 diabetes in violation of the FCA and New York State False Claims Act. Relator was a former chemist and patent litigator at a competitor pharmaceutical company. The court observed that the evidence necessary to achieve the inference of fraud essential to satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) generally requires the relator to plead, inter alia, the "'specific medical providers who allegedly submitted false claims,' the 'rough time periods, locations, and amounts of the claims,' and 'the specific government programs to which the claims were made.'"

Public Disclosure Bar Applies When Relator Relied on Form 10-K

In United States of Am. ex rel. Silver v. Omnicare, No. 11-1326, 2016 WL 6997010 (D.N.J. Nov. 28, 2016), the court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss based on the public disclosure bar and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state mini-FCA claims. The FCA's public disclosure bar deprives courts of jurisdiction over qui tam suits when the relevant information has already entered the public domain. If X + Y = Z, where Z is fraud, the public disclosure bar applies if either Z, or both X (misrepresented facts) and Y (true facts) are publicly disclosed by way of a listed source. The relator examined U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Form 10-Ks available on the internet to infer that PharMerica is selling prescription drugs to nursing homes at "below cost per diems." He also made random phone calls to nursing homes that "confirmed" his suspicions that PharMerica is offering below cost per diem pricing, and he met with a consultant for nursing homes who, however, did not tell him that PharMerica was offering below cost per diem pricing. Even if the public disclosure bar would otherwise apply to a claim, it does not when the person bringing the action is an original source of the information. In this case, the court ruled that this exception does not apply.

Antitrust

FTC's Geographic Market Definition Applicable to Hospital Merger Upheld

In Federal Trade Comm'n v. Advocate Health Care Network, 841 F. 3d 460 (7th Cir. 2016), the court of appeals reversed and remanded the district court's decision denying a motion for preliminary injunction meant to enjoin a proposed merger of hospitals on the grounds that the district court reached the wrong conclusions about the proposed geographic market. First, the district court erred in rejecting the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) expert's candidate market as too narrow due to circularity of reasoning. Pursuant to the hypothetical monopolist test, the expert proposed a candidate market, simulated a monopolization of that market, then adjusted the candidate market and re-ran the simulation. The court of appeals ruled this was not circular but properly iterative. Second, the court of appeals ruled that the district court erred in rejecting the FTC expert's proposed geographical market due to exclusion from the market of academic hospitals. Demand for academic hospitals differs from demand for general acute care centers, which draw patients from smaller geographic areas. Third, the district court erred in rejecting the FTC expert's proposed geographical market due to the expert's determination that patients generally choose nearby hospitals. Last, the district court erred in assuming that measures of patient substitution such as diversion ratios, which examine where a patient would go for care if his or her first choice was unavailable, translated into options for insurers' networks.

Syringe Supplier's Alleged False Advertising Was Not Anticompetitive

In Retractable Tech., Inc. v. Becton Dickinson & Co., No. 14-41384, 2016 WL 7046601 (5th Cir. Dec. 2, 2016), the court of appeals ruled that a competitor's false advertising that its syringes were the "world's sharpest" and had "low waste space" was not actionable anticompetitive conduct. According to the court, "absent a demonstration that a competitor's false advertisements had the potential to eliminate, or did in fact eliminate, competition, an antitrust lawsuit will not lie." Additionally, the court ruled that patent infringement is not an injury cognizable under the Sherman Act and that the competitor did not engage in predatory or anticompetitive conduct by allegedly tainting the market for retractable syringes. Calling the tainting theory "entirely illogical as a vehicle to prove exclusionary conduct," the court asked, "If BD set out to exclude RTI from the market by tainting its own product, who would be the loser?"

Credentialing and Peer Review

Judicially Created "Crime-Fraud Exception" to Peer Review Privilege Reversed

In Novotny v. Sacred Heart Health Servs., Nos. 27615, 27626, 27631, 2016 WL 6393782 (S.D. Oct. 26, 2016), in connection with their lawsuit against the defendants for negligence, negligent credentialing, fraud, deceit, bad faith peer review, unjust enrichment, racketeering and conspiracy, plaintiffs moved to compel production of independent-source materials directly from a peer review committee and asked the circuit court to find unconstitutional South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) §36-4-26.1, which grants a privilege to peer review materials. The circuit court ruled that the statute is constitutional, but only if a "crime-fraud exception" exists, which it created and determined was met in this case, and ordered the defendants to produce the information sought under protective order without an "in camera" review. The court of appeals reversed and ruled that the litigants are not entitled to discover any of the materials within the peer review committee's possession but may obtain such information from independent sources. Plaintiffs invited the court of appeals to weigh the public policy of peer review confidentiality against their need for evidence and of revealing instances of bad faith peer review, but the court of appeals observed that neither the circuit court nor plaintiffs had identified a protected liberty or property interest at stake that the state deprived. For example, plaintiffs failed to show that they have no other access to information necessary for the causes of action that they are claiming, and they failed to provide authority for the proposition that their right to open courts, under S.D. Const. art. VI, §20 is violated when a litigant is denied access to the best and most relevant information to establish their claim. The court of appeals concluded, "[C]arving out an exception in this case is a task better left for the Legislature, which by statute created the peer review privilege."

Neurosurgeon Subject to Peer Review Process is a Protected Whistleblower

In Armin v. Riverside Cmty. Hosp., No. G052125, 2016 WL 6805466 (Ca. App. Div. 3 Nov. 16, 2016), the court of appeal ruled that a neurosurgeon need not complete an internal peer review process prior to filing a hospital whistleblower retaliation claim, notwithstanding what the hospital characterized as the sheer absurdity of a doctor who is himself the object of peer review disciplinary proceedings being able to de facto retaliate against medical staff for having brought the action in the first instance. A hospital's medical staff has a statutory conditional opportunity to seek a court injunction to stop discovery propounded by the plaintiff under California Health and Safety Code §1278.5 upon a showing of interference with an ongoing peer review proceeding, but the proceeding itself is not precluded. Moreover, the court ruled that the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (HCQIA) affords, at most, merely a presumptive and, hence, rebuttable immunity from Section 1278.5 proceedings requiring factual investigation. The court also determined that a physician may not name individual physicians involved in the peer review process who allegedly instigated the process in retaliation for the physician's whistleblowing in a Section 1278.5 complaint. Last, the court determined that, where the physician first voiced complaints of religious discrimination including anti-Semitic slurs prior to the initiation of the peer review proceedings, the complaint was not so intertwined with the peer review proceedings as to subject his discrimination claims to an anti-strategic lawsuit against public participation motion.

Regulation and Legislation

  • The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released on Dec. 12, 2016, the final 2018 Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters outlining, inter alia, changes to the ACA risk adjustment program, stating user fees for federally facilitated exchange and state-based exchanges on the federal platform, standardized plan benefits and special enrollment periods.
  • Twenty-five HHS regulations are under review at the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) as a precursor to publication in the Federal Register. Several additional HHS regulations were anticipated for release this year, but their fate is now uncertain. Examples of affected regulations include final 340B Drug Discount Program Mega-Guidance; Pass-Through Payments in Medicaid Managed Care Delivery Systems; Advancing Care Coordination Through Episode Payment Models; Medicare Part B Demonstration; 2018 Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters; and Revisions to Safe Harbors Under the Anti-Kickback Statute, and Civil Monetary Penalty Rules Regarding Beneficiary Inducements and Gainsharing.
  • CMS issued a memorandum on Dec. 9, 2016, stating that it has suspended enforcement of its rule prohibiting long-term care facilities that participate in Medicare or Medicaid from entering into pre-dispute arbitration clauses as long as a court-ordered injunction remains in place entered in Am. Health Care Ass'n v. Burwell, No. 3:16-cv-00233, 2016 WL 6585295 (N.D. Miss. Nov. 7, 2016), citing 81 Fed. Reg. at 68,867 (to be codified at 42 C.F.R. §483.70(n)(1).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions