The Health Law Firm

JULY 9, 2012

Between 2006 and 2011, the man allegedly billed Medicare for transporting kidney dialysis patients who did not medically need ambulance service. The indictment alleges that the man used a "straw" owner (someone who was not actually the owner) to fraudulently open Starcare Ambulance because he was otherwise ineligible to own the company.

Medicare 40

Medicare Medicare Fraud 40

The Health Law Firm

DECEMBER 24, 2015

Dr. Harold Persaud was convicted earlier this year of one count of health care fraud, 13 counts of making false statements and one count of engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from criminal activity. From 2006 to 2012, Dr.

Licensing 40

Licensing Fraud 40

Provider Trust

MAY 18, 2022

Moon , for submitting claims while excluded from March 2006 through July 2013. Moon In this enforcement example, an owner was excluded, but hid behind the corporate veil of a company, which eventually led to both individual and company fines and exclusions. In January 2015, the OIG settled for $96,259 with a Minnesota Pharmacist, Joseph C.

Compliance 52

Compliance Due Diligence Medicaid Medicaid 52

Hall Render

APRIL 6, 2022

However, some of the defendant’s customers typically paid less than the retail price for their medications through several discount programs that the defendant offered between 2006 and 2015. This footnote originated as a footnote in a memorandum issued by CMS in October of 2006.

Medicare 72

Medicare Medicare Medicaid Medicaid 72

Drug & Device Law

DECEMBER 4, 2023

Basically, CPAP II purported to do precisely what Buckman itself prohibited: using express preemption to limit the “ordinary working” of implied preemption of fraud on the FDA claims. 2006), aff’d , 526 F.3d We saw more of the same with the discussion of consumer fraud claims in CPAP II. Ackermann v. 2d 739, 747 (E.D.

Fraud 52

Fraud FDA Hospitals Doctors 52

Drug & Device Law

DECEMBER 12, 2022

2006 WL 2038436, at *8 (N.D.N.Y. July 19, 2006) (“damages available to [plaintiff] under Sections 349 and 350 are limited” and do not include innovator liability-based suicide claim). Olin Corp. , 3d 148, 154 (2d Cir. 1997) (“a manufacturing defect. . . Similarly, the alleged claims asserting consumer protection statutes, N.Y.

FDA 115

FDA Public Health Fraud Hospitals 115

Drug & Device Law

FEBRUARY 2, 2023

2006) (reversal concerned warning issues); Blackmon v. Atkinson pointed out that the main exception – fraud on the FDA − to this otherwise not easily rebutted presumption of warning adequacy is preempted. Hoffman-La Roche, Inc. 2007 WL 4042757, at *3 (N.D. 15, 2007); McNeil v. Wyeth , 2005 WL 544222, at *6 (N.D. 3d 364 (5th Cir.

FDA 59

FDA Licensing Fraud 59

Drug & Device Law

DECEMBER 30, 2022

A shout out to Dustin Rawlin and his colleagues for sticking it out on this case and sending us this decision. The core facts of the case were simple, but the shifting allegations on reporting were not.

FDA 59

FDA Fraud 59

Drug & Device Law

MAY 4, 2023

The intersection between these statutes, or the more complete “FDA defense” provisions in Michigan and Texas, and Buckman ’s prohibition on fraud-on-the-FDA claims has been the subject of variable treatment from courts. 2006), aff’d by equally divided court , 552 U.S. Warner-Lambert & Co. , 3d 85, 98 (2d Cir.

FDA 64

FDA Compliance Fraud 64

Drug & Device Law

AUGUST 14, 2023

2006) (applying the Pennsylvania prohibition to medical devices) under the false pretense that the plaintiffs in that case were pro se during the appeal. Medtronic, Inc. , Not only is that completely irrelevant, since the Superior Court itself made the decision to publish Creazzo as precedential, but it is simply false as a factual matter.

Fraud 52

Fraud 52

Drug & Device Law

FEBRUARY 15, 2024

2022) (recognizing the following product defect liability theories: “(1) negligent design of the product; (2) negligent manufacture of the product; (3) negligent failure to warn about some aspect of the product; (4) breach of express or implied warranty; or (5) misrepresentation or fraud”). Auto Owners Ins. 2d 277, 286 (Mich.

FDA 52

FDA Compliance Fraud Hospitals 52

Drug & Device Law

MAY 26, 2022

9(b), “[i]n alleging fraud or mistake, a party must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake.” In particular, MDLs seem to have an unfortunate habit of allowing general allegations to support fraudulent misrepresentation claims and other claims based on alleged fraud or mistake. Under Fed.

Fraud 59

Fraud FDA Doctors 59

Drug & Device Law

MARCH 22, 2022

Her current lawsuit brought claims under the Connecticut Product Liability Act (CPLA) and for common law fraud. What remained were claims for fraud and misrepresentation. To the extent any fraud claims were based on “incomplete warnings,” they were dismissed on the same grounds as failure to warn. . § 300aa-10 et seq.

Fraud 59

Fraud FDA Doctors 59

Drug & Device Law

MAY 5, 2022

Stated differently, the rebuttal provision makes allegations and evidence of fraud on the FDA a prerequisite to state-law liability. But state-law claims that rest on alleged fraud on the FDA are contrary to Buckman Co. 2006), aff’d by an equally divided court sub nom. Plaintiffs’ Legal Committee , 531 U.S. 21 U.S.C. §

Compliance 52

Compliance FDA Fraud 52