First, SNAP purportedly paid commissions and bonuses to its sales force for selling multi-night testing to providers, and it gave free home sleep tests to physicians and their families to induce referrals. In addition, the government alleged that SNAP’s business model relied on multiple unlawful kickback schemes. In particular, Raviv allegedly instructed SNAP to submit claims for patients’ second and third nights of home sleep testing when the company knew they were medically unnecessary because only a single night of testing was needed to effectively diagnose certain sleep disorders. Since Medicare began covering home sleep testing in 2009, SNAP has received nearly $9 million from Medicare – almost all of it the result of fraud and kickbacks, according to the government’s allegations.Īs alleged by the government, SNAP, its founder Gil Raviv, and its vice president Stephen Burton violated the False Claims Act and the Anti-Kickback Statute through various fraudulent billing practices. The suits alleged that a suburban Chicago diagnostics company, SNAP Diagnostics, LLC, that provides home testing for sleep disorders was defrauding Medicare and four other federal health care programs through kickbacks and unnecessary testing. ![]() The Department of Justice recently announced that it resolved two civil lawsuits filed under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act to the tune of nearly $4 million. The privacy policy statement is set out at Data Privacy | Dorsey. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Results depend on a number of factors unique to each matter. Some of the content on this blog is considered Attorney Advertising under the applicable rules of certain states. The opinions expressed on the blog are the opinions of the authors only and not those of Dorsey. The information on the blog may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date, and may not reflect the most current legal developments. Information sent to Dorsey by persons who are not clients of the firm is not subject to any duty of confidentiality on the part of the firm. An attorney-client relationship with Dorsey may be established only by an engagement letter signed by a Dorsey lawyer. Transmission and receipt of the materials on the blog do not constitute legal advice, establish an attorney-client relationship, or create any duty of Dorsey to any reader. ![]() The information you are requesting is not legal advice, advertising or solicitation. ![]() By accessing the FCA Now blog, you are requesting information.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |