May 02, 2022

DOJ Demonstrates Commitment to COVID-19-Related Healthcare Enforcement with New Criminal Charges

You've Reached Your
Free Article Limit This Month
Register for free to get unlimited access to all OnPractice content.
Register Now

On April 20, 2022, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a nationwide coordinated law enforcement action focused on COVID-19-related healthcare fraud. In total, DOJ brought criminal charges against 21 individuals, including physicians and healthcare executives, in connection with alleged fraud schemes resulting in almost $150 million in improper government claims. These new criminal charges, as well as recent civil and administrative actions, come on the heels of DOJ statements reaffirming its commitment to aggressively pursuing COVID-19-related healthcare frauds, and provide further evidence that DOJ's enforcement efforts in this area are likely to continue for the foreseeable future.


The specific charges brought during the April 2022 enforcement action are consistent with DOJ's longstanding COVID-19-related healthcare fraud priorities and are similar to charges pursued during a May 2021 COVID-19 healthcare fraud enforcement action. These new charges focus on the following COVID-19-related enforcement priorities:

  • Telehealth. In recent years, DOJ and the US Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) have consistently prioritized prosecuting fraudulent telehealth schemes. The April 2022 enforcement action follow this trend. For example, at least one medical professional was charged in connection with his role in a kickback scheme that involved billing for sham telemedicine encounters and agreeing to order unnecessary genetic testing in exchange for access to telehealth patients.
  • Provider Relief Fund. The April 2022 enforcement action also reflects DOJ's continued focus on fraud in connection with the Provider Relief Fund (PRF), which was created as part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act to provide direct payments to "eligible health care providers for health care-related expenses [and] lost revenues that are attributable to coronavirus." Two defendants were charged with misappropriating PRF monies. Although the PRF cases to date all focus on blatant instances of fraud and abuse in connection with the PRF, more complex PRF cases are expected to follow, both in the criminal and civil space.
  • Improper Billing Schemes. DOJ and HHS-OIG continue to target improper billing schemes that involve COVID-19 services. Several cases in the April 2022 enforcement action involve defendants who allegedly offered COVID-19 testing, then used beneficiary information to submit false and fraudulent claims for other services that were either medically unnecessary or never provided.

In announcing these new charges, DOJ Criminal Division Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite, Jr., emphasized DOJ's "commitment to using all available tools to hold accountable medical professionals, corporate executives, and others who have placed greed above care during an unprecedented public health emergency." HHS Inspector General Christi A. Grimm also highlighted HHS-OIG's commitment to pursuing COVID-19-related fraud, stating that the "attempt to profit from the COVID-19 pandemic by targeting beneficiaries and stealing from federal health programs is unconscionable."

DOJ and HHS-OIG's civil and administrative enforcement activity also appears to be picking up steam. For example, in early April 2022, DOJ settled a False Claims Act and Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act case involving a COVID-19-related improper billing scheme for almost $25 million. Among other things, DOJ alleged that a Florida healthcare provider attempted to compensate for lower revenues during the pandemic by requiring physicians to schedule unnecessary evaluation and management appointments and ordering medically unnecessary testing services. The provider also falsely claimed that it was not engaged in illegal activity when it applied for and obtained a $5.9 million Paycheck Protection Program loan.

In connection with the April 2022 enforcement action, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Center for Program Integrity announced that it had taken administrative actions against 28 providers for their alleged involvement in fraud, waste and abuse schemes related to the delivery of care for COVID-19, as well as other schemes that capitalized upon the public health emergency.

Although the United States appears to be finally emerging from the pandemic, the federal government's COVID-19-related healthcare enforcement activity shows no signs of slowing down. DOJ, HHS-OIG, and other federal and state agencies continue to aggressively pursue pandemic-related criminal, civil and administrative healthcare enforcement actions. Healthcare companies, hospital systems and providers should prepare for this increased scrutiny by taking proactive steps to minimize their enforcement risk. For specific practice pointers on how to mitigative these risks and improve existing compliance programs, please see McDermott's recent Healthcare Enforcement Quarterly.

ALM expressly disclaims any express or implied warranty regarding the OnPractice Content, including any implied warranty that the OnPractice Content is accurate, has been corrected or is otherwise free from errors.

More From McDermott Will & Emery

On the Road Again: Alternative Designs May Impact Trade Dress Functionality Analysis

By Kavya Rallabhandi McDermott Will & Emery May 25 , 2023

The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed and remanded a summary judgment ruling, finding that there were genuine disputes of material fact regarding whether the plaintiff’s alleged trade dress was functional and therefore excluded from trade dress protection.

Elevate the $: Geographic Isolation Helps Defeat Trademark Infringement Claim

By Kat Lynch McDermott Will & Emery May 25 , 2023

In a case between similarly named banks, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit confirmed expert disclosure requirements, conducted a de novo likelihood of confusion analysis and ultimately upheld a finding of no trademark infringement.

First Circuit: Claim Preclusion Shouldn't Apply to Bar Claims Under VARA

By Hannah Cohen McDermott Will & Emery May 25 , 2023

Addressing for the first time whether federal res judicata law recognizes the alternative determinations doctrine, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit determined that a plaintiff’s claims under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) were not precluded by a previous action in which she brought a federal copyright claim against the defendant.

More From Health Care

Schedule A I-140: Fast-Track Green Card for Nurses and Physical Therapists

By Caterina Cappellari Greenberg Traurig May 26 , 2023

Most employment-based permanent residency applications require the applicant to go through the PERM labor certification process where the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) certifies that there are not sufficient U.S. workers able, available, and qualified to fill a position.

Challenging OSHA Violations at Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission Is Worth the Effort

By Melanie L. Paul Jackson Lewis P.C. May 26 , 2023

It is more important than ever that employers understand the serious long-term, non-monetary consequences of settling or accepting Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) citations.

Congress Adds AKS and Stark Law Exceptions for Certain Wellness Programs

By Denise Burke McDermott Will & Emery May 25 , 2023

As a part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (CAA), Congress passed new exceptions to the Physician Self-Referral Law (Stark Law) and the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS) allowing certain healthcare entities to provide mental health or behavioral health improvement and/or maintenance programs to physicians and other clinicians.

Featured Stories