Administrative Agency Civil Procedure Health

Read need-to-know updates, commentary, and analysis on Administrative Agency issues written by leading professionals.
News & Analysis as of

Recent Court and Agency Actions Suggest Increased Antitrust Risk Over Disgorgement, Particularly in the Pharmaceutical Industry

Recent court and agency rulings highlight important takeaways involving disgorgement in antitrust proceedings. Companies, especially those in the pharmaceutical industry, increasingly should ensure they properly calibrate...more

Challenge to DSH Adjustment Estimates Barred by Statute

In a decision issued on March 31, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a challenge by Florida Health Sciences Center, Inc., also known as Tampa General Hospital, to the calculation of its...more

Otsuka’s Orphan Drug Exclusivity Claims: FDA Rips Off the Band-Aid Early

On April 20, 2015, FDA filed a brief in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) or Preliminary Injunction (“PI”), addressed how Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Otsuka Pharmaceutical...more

Developments in Judicial Deference of Administrative Agency Actions

In my post of April 2, Divided Supreme Court Restricts Provider Challenges to State Medicaid Rates, I wrote about the March 31st Supreme Court decision that providers may not sue in federal court over the adequacy of state...more

The Supreme Court Holds That Medicaid Providers Cannot Sue To Enforce Federal Reimbursement Rate Standards

On March 31, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, Inc., holding that Medicaid providers cannot sue to enforce reimbursement standards set forth in federal Medicaid law....more

Telemedicine Providers Need to Keep Up with State Laws

Tech-savvy health care providers and tech-savvy patients in California can be grateful for California’s policies regarding telehealth practices. Consider the turmoil in Texas: telehealth practitioners who want to treat...more

Otsuka’s Pediatric Labeling Dispute Seeks to Expand Orphan Drug Exclusivity

On April 13, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued an Order granting Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development and Commercialization, Inc., and Otsuka America...more

Open Season on Provider-controlled Licensing Boards

In a closely followed decision with significant consequences for state licensing boards and their members, the Supreme Court in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 135 S. Ct. 1101...more

Supreme Court Blocks Provider Challenges to Medicaid Program

On March 31, 2015, the Supreme Court issued the first of several expected decisions that will impact the healthcare industry this year, ruling that Medicaid providers have no constitutional or statutory right to challenge a...more

The Pitfalls of Settling Qui Tam Lawsuits

In a recent federal court case, the federal government and the State of California successfully enforced an oral settlement agreement of a qui tam lawsuit against a health care provider. United States v. North East Medical...more

Also In The News - Health Headlines - March 2015 #2

Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health Hearing Regarding 340B Drug Pricing Program – On Thursday, March 5, 2015, the Subcommittee on Health, chaired by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA), is holding a hearing titled...more

CMS Publishes Final Rule Establishing Appeal Process for Applicable Plans in Medicare Secondary Payer Cases

On February 27, 2015, CMS published a final rule, effective April 28, 2015, to establish a formal, multilevel administrative appeals process for applicable plans against which Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) recovery demands...more

Narrowing Of FCA Public Disclosure Bar Continues

On Feb. 25, 2015, the Sixth Circuit became the latest federal court of appeals to weigh in on the scope of the False Claims Act’s public disclosure bar in its decision in United States ex rel. Whipple v. Chattanooga-Hamilton...more

High Court Sides with DOL, Holding that Agencies May Flip-Flop on Regulatory Interpretations Without Engaging in...

In June, we wrote that the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to address whether a federal agency (in this case, the Department of Labor) must engage in formal notice-and-comment rulemaking in order to significantly alter its...more

The FCA and the Ever-Narrowing Public Disclosure Bar

On February 25, 2015, the Sixth Circuit became the latest federal court of appeals to weigh in on the scope of the False Claims Act’s (FCA) public disclosure bar in its decision in United States ex rel. Whipple v....more

Supreme Court Ruling's Implications for Healthcare Professions

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a state professional board controlled by active market participants must be supervised by a state to enjoy protection from federal antitrust laws....more

Supreme Court Denies Antitrust Shield for NC Dental Board

On Wednesday, February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court released a 6-3 decision in North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, a case with potentially broad implications for regulation by dental and...more

Supreme Court: State Agencies Controlled by Active Market Participants Must Have Active State Supervision to Qualify for Antitrust...

In a 6–3 decision issued February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States held in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission that if active market participants control an entity—even a...more

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That to Invoke Antitrust Immunity, State Agencies Controlled by Market Participants Must Prove Active...

On Feb. 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 6-3 decision that a state board with a controlling number of decision-makers who are active market participants in the occupation the board regulates does not enjoy state...more

Supreme Court Holds State Regulatory Board Not Immune From Antitrust Laws

On February 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners (“Dental Board”) is not shielded from federal antitrust law under the doctrine of state-action antitrust...more

US Supreme Court: state agencies must be "actively supervised" to enjoy antitrust immunity – 5 tips

Do you sit on a state board or are you regulated by one? If so, the United States Supreme Court decided a case last Wednesday that directly affects you. Until recently, many assumed that a state agency or board enjoyed...more

Ministry Motivation Costs Hospital $59 Million

Sometimes doing the right thing for the right reason can be costly. Last week it cost nonprofit Via Christi Regional Medical Center $59 million....more

"2014-15 Supreme Court Highlights"

Approaching the midpoint of its 2014-15 term, the Supreme Court has added to its docket several cases with potentially wide-reaching implications for a range of important policy and business issues. The Court accepted for...more

No Judicial Relief to the ALJ Waiting Game — Yet

In May 2014, the American Hospital Association filed suit against the United States Department of Health and Human Services seeking to compel Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) to comply with applicable statutory deadlines for...more

Williams Mullen and Local Counsel, Bryan Davis, Win Declaratory Action Against HSD in New Mexico!!

For those of you who follow my blog, you know that the single state agency in New Mexico, Human Services Department (HSD), accused 15 behavioral health care providers, which made up 87% of the mental health care in NM, of...more

216 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 9

Follow Administrative Agency Updates on:

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.
×