In July 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled on the appeal filed by three former Purdue Frederick Co. executives regarding their 12-year exclusion imposed by the Secretary of HHS. While the court noted that the Secretary does have authority to impose an exclusion, it remanded on the ground that the duration of the exclusion was not supported by an adequate "reasoned explanation." More specifically, reviewing the agency determination under the "arbitrary and capricious" standard, the court observed that 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7(b)(1)(A) "authorizes exclusion of an individual whose conviction was for conduct factually related to fraud," but took issue with the agency's reliance on precedents that did not involve the type of exclusion at issue (i.e., discretionary exclusions based on misdemeanor), but instead arose out of mandatory exclusions for felony convictions. Concluding that the precedents cited by the Secretary did not justify the Purdue executives' 12-year exclusion, the court was nevertheless careful not to opine as to whether the 12-year period might be justified; the agency will have an opportunity to present its justification to the district court on remand. For more, see here.