District of Minnesota Rejects But-For Causation in the AKS Context
In a recent opinion from the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, the court analyzed the interplay between the False Claims Act and the Anti-Kickback Statute. This opinion is significant because the court recognized conflicting evidence on inducements, and rejected but-for causation to violate the AKS.
In United States ex rel. Fesenmaier v. Cameron-Ehlen Group, Inc., Defendant “is a distributor of intraocular lenses and other products related to ophthalmic surgeries.” Its products are provided “to ophthalmologists and facilities for use in ophthalmology procedures, including cataract surgeries.” The Relator alleged that Defendant “offered unlawful kickbacks and that, as a result of those kickbacks, false and fraudulent claims for payment were made to federal health care programs, including Medicare”. The court detailed a story of alleged kickbacks including, inter alia, private flights to a springtime Georgia golf tournament, New York City getaways, South Dakota hunting trips, and $1,000+ steakhouse dinners.
Source:
