The US government recently filed a brief in opposition to Sutter Health's motion to dismiss the Department of Justice's (DOJ's) complaint in intervention in a False Claims Act suit alleging that Sutter had knowingly submitted and caused the submission of unsupported diagnosis codes for Medicare Advantage organisation patients in order to inflate Medicare reimbursement. The brief reinforces the DOJ's increasingly aggressive enforcement of the Medicare Advantage space under the False Claims Act.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Labour and the Treasury have jointly announced that they will not enforce the HHS's recently finalised policy that limits private health plans' use of accumulator programmes to prescription brand drugs for which a medically appropriate generic equivalent is available. Stakeholders should remain alert to any changes in state enforcement policies and consider opportunities to engage with the administration on future revisions.
Beaver Medical Group LP and an affiliated physician recently agreed to pay a combined total of $5 million to resolve allegations that providers had knowingly submitted diagnosis codes that were not supported by medical records in order to inflate reimbursements from Medicare. The settlement reflects the Department of Justice's continuing efforts to use its enforcement power to pursue fraud in the Medicare Advantage space despite recent setbacks.
Sutter Health recently filed a motion to dismiss the Department of Justice's (DOJ's) complaint in intervention in a False Claims Act suit which alleged that Sutter had knowingly submitted and caused the submission of unsupported diagnoses codes for Medicare Advantage patients in order to inflate Medicare reimbursements. Sutter's motion reflects the industry's continued resistance to the DOJ's enforcement under the False Claims Act on the basis of potentially unsupported diagnoses codes for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, without more evidence.
In a recent opinion, the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) in the US Department of Justice concluded that an article intended to effectuate capital punishment by a state or the federal government is not subject to regulation by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. The OLC's opinion appears to have been issued as a result of litigation involving the FDA's obligation to block the entry of misbranded and unapproved drugs used under state lethal injection protocols.