Recently, in United States ex rel. Hart v. McKesson Corp., the Second Circuit clarified the standard for acting “willfully” under the federal anti-kickback statute (AKS).
False Claims Act relator Adam Hart alleged that the defendant violated the AKS by providing business management tools to its customers, without charge, to induce those customers to purchase drugs from them. The tools helped providers to maximize profits and mitigate the risk that reimbursement rates would fall below the cost of the drugs to them. One tool, the Margin Analyzer, compared profit margins for drugs considered to be interchangeable, and the second, the Regimen Profiler, provided margin information for an entire course of treatment as opposed to specific drugs. The unlawful kickback, according to relator, was that the defendant did not offer these tools on a stand-alone basis, but only offered them to providers who agreed to use the defendant as their primary wholesaler of branded and generic drugs. The defendant allegedly provided the tools as a kickback to induce drug sales.
The Second Circuit first addressed the proper understanding of “willfulness” under the AKS. The Court held that, in order to violate the federal AKS, a defendant must act knowing that the conduct is in some way unlawful but does not have to know specifically that the conduct violates the AKS. The Court stated that this interpretation accords with the general goal of criminal law to punish only those who act with a “vicious will.” Notably, in 2010, Congress amended the AKS to provide that a violation does not require actual knowledge of the AKS or a specific intent to violate the AKS. Also, particularly with respect to the analysis of applications of AKS safe harbors to conduct, this interpretation also avoids unfairly sweeping innocent conduct under the reach of the criminal statute.Continue Reading Second Circuit Defines “Willfulness” Standard Under Anti-Kickback Statute
EDNY Judge Nina Gershon analyzed several False Claims Act issues in 
In federal criminal investigations, corporate health care providers have faced a Department of Justice increasingly focused on individuals, one that has limited or foreclosed cooperation credit for corporations not providing complete information on all individual involvement. At a conference in late November, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein outlined a 
In 
EDNY Judge Brian Cogan recently addressed the False Claims Act public disclosure bar and original source rule in a decision based on a qui tam Relator’s claims that defendants marketed a test to measure the levels of a certain hormone knowing that the test was flawed. In 
A hospital victimized by the sale of adulterated and mislabeled drug products successful obtained a Court order imposing restitution of over $825,000 earlier this month. EDNY Judge I. Leo Glasser’s decision in 
Last week, in