Advanced Care Scripts Inc., $1.4 million

Elizabeth Shofner, Justin Brooks Articles, Nancy Gertner Articles, Reuben Guttman Articles, Successes, Traci Buschner Articles

United States of America ex rel. Paul Nee v. Biogen, Inc., et. al. District of Massachusetts.

GBB attorneys settled this qui tam suit against Advanced Care Scripts and Biogen, one of the worlds’ largest pharmaceutical companies. The complaint, filed by a whistleblower under the False Claims Act, alleged that Defendants used charitable organizations in a kickback scheme to pay the Medicare copays for multiple sclerosis drugs Avonex and Tysabri. Medicare subsequently paid the claims for these drugs, which can cost as much $80,000 per patient per year. 

Read more: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/pharma-giant-and-speciality-pharmacy-settle-case-alleging-false-claims-violations-301195541.html?tc=eml_cleartime

Biogen Inc., $22 million

Elizabeth Shofner, Justin Brooks Articles, Nancy Gertner Articles, Reuben Guttman Articles, Successes, Traci Buschner Articles

United States of America ex rel. Paul Nee v. Biogen, Inc., et. al. District of Massachusetts.

GBB attorneys settled this qui tam suit against Advanced Care Scripts and Biogen, one of the worlds’ largest pharmaceutical companies. The complaint, filed by a whistleblower under the False Claims Act, alleged that Defendants used charitable organizations in a kickback scheme to pay the Medicare copays for multiple sclerosis drugs Avonex and Tysabri. Medicare subsequently paid the claims for these drugs, which can cost as much $80,000 per patient per year. 

Read more: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/pharma-giant-and-speciality-pharmacy-settle-case-alleging-false-claims-violations-301195541.html?tc=eml_cleartime

Geissler v. Sterling

Dr. Caroline Poplin Articles, Elizabeth Shofner, Nancy Gertner Articles, Paul Zwier Articles, Reuben Guttman Articles, Successes

District of South Carolina.

GBB lawyers contributed to this class action lawsuit, filed against the Department of Correction, alleging that South Carolina prisoners recieved inadequate testing and treatment for hepatitis C (HCV). The complaint accuses DOC director Bryan Sterling of “deliberate indifference” by neglecting to implement regular testing and effective treatment protocols, because it would have incurred a significant cost to the DOC budget. The original plaintiffs, three inmates in SC state prison, argued that the DOC had violated their 8th Amendment Rights by failing to provide proper treatment. Further, the South Carolina DOC written policy states that HCV is not tested for “except under limited circumstances,” which runs contrary to CDC guidelines.

Hudson Valley Hematology Oncology Associates, $5.3 million

Elizabeth Shofner, Justin Brooks Articles, Reuben Guttman Articles, Successes, Traci Buschner Articles

U.S. ex rel. Abrahamsen v. Hudson Valley,
Southern District of New York.

Firm attorneys brought a qui tam suit against Hudson Valley Hematology Oncology Associates (Hudson Valley), a New York based treatment center for patients with blood disorders and cancer. The complaint alleges that Hudson Valley illegally billed Medicare and Medicaid for services that were improperly documented and/or were not rendered. Hudson Valley was also accused of violating the Anti-Kickback Statute by waiving copayments and adding the waived fees to claims for Medicare reimbursement. The relator, a former billing department employee at Hudson Valley, recieved between 10-25% of the funds recovered for the government. Hudson Valley also entered into a corporate integrity agreement as part of the settlement. 

Read more: https://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/story/news/local/2016/10/21/medicare-hudson-valley-hematology-oncology/92510938/

Oral Roberts University, $300,000

Elizabeth Shofner, Justin Brooks Articles, Reuben Guttman Articles, Successes, Traci Buschner Articles

United States ex rel. Shoe v. Oral Roberts University,
District of South Carolina.

GBB attorney’s brought this False Claims Act case against Oklahoma based ORU alleging that the university had fraudulently billed the Department of Education after violating the federal ban on incentive-based compensation. The whistleblower contended that ORU hired Shoe Inc., a student recruiting firm, then paid them with a portion of the tuitions of recruited students. Title IV of the higher education act prohibits any university receiving federal student aid from compensating recruiters based on the number of students successfully recruited. Maurice Shoe, the whistleblower and co-owner of Shoe, was awarded $45,000. 

1 2 3 4