We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 164

Proposed amendments in Medicare's 2008 Physician Fee Schedule would impact existing arrangements under Stark law

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 30 2007

On July 12, 2007, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”), as part of the proposed 2008 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, also proposed changes to the Stark physician self-referral regulations

Employer health coverage under the Final 409A Regulations should plan sponsors be worried?

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 25 2007

The recent Final Regulations provide that Code Section 409A does not apply to an Archer Medical Savings Account, a Health Savings Account “or any other medical reimbursement arrangement, including a Health Reimbursement Arrangement, that satisfies the requirements of Code section 105 and section 106 such that the benefits or reimbursements provided under such arrangement are not includible in income.”

TTAB rules that fraud in less than all classes does not warrant cancellation of multi-class registration in toto

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 11 2009

On January 29, 2009, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office answered a significant open question in the post-Medinol era, namely, whether a finding of fraud with regard to fewer than all International Classes in a multi-Class trademark registration requires cancellation of the entire registration or whether cancellation will be limited to all goodsservices in the Class in which fraud is found

Medical treatment and diagnostic claims are patentable

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 18 2009

The Federal Circuit has calmed some anxiety over the patentability of medical diagnostic methods under 35 U.S.C. 101 with its decision in Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, holding that some method of treatment and diagnostic methods are indeed patentable subject matter

A benefits primer on the economic stimulus package COBRA, Transit and HIPAA

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 24 2009

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ('ARRA') was signed into law by President Obama on February 17, 2009

What health care companies need to know about recent amendments to federal False Claims Act

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 18 2009

On May 20, 2009, President Obama signed into law the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (“FERA”), which includes the first significant amendment of the civil False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. 3729-3733, since 1986

Landmark genetic nondiscrimination legislation

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 21 2008

Today, President Bush signed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (“GINA”), which Congress passed in late April

HHS GINA proposed regulations HIPAA-covered entities impacted

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 13 2009

Section 105 of the Genetic Information Non-discrimination Act of 2008 ("GINA") provides that a group health plan or health insurer may not use or disclose genetic information for purposes of underwriting

GINA interim final regulations wellness and disease management programs impacted

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 13 2009

Title I of the Genetic Information Non-discrimination Act of 2008 ("GINA") generally prohibits group health plans, health insurance issuers in the group and individual markets and issuers of Medicare supplemental policies from using genetic information to discriminate and from collecting genetic information

Federal legislation to prohibit “reverse payment” agreements between brand name and generic drug manufacturers set for vote in the U.S. Senate

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 28 2009

In recent developments that affect both brand name and generic drug manufacturers, both houses of Congress continue to debate legislation that, if passed as expected later this year, will make so-called generic "pay for delay" settlements presumptively unlawful