Health Law Daily Wrap Up, WORTH NOTING—Other Health Law litigation and regulatory developments, (Mar 23, 2026)

By WK Editorial Staff

A roundup of other items of interest to the Health Law community.

ADMINISTRATION OF MEDICARE/MEDICAID PROGRAMS—DAB DECISIONS: The ALJ affirmed that the Inspector General (IG) properly excluded the Provider from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all other federal health care programs for six years pursuant to section 1128(a)(1) of the Social Security Act because the Provider was convicted of a criminal offense related to the delivery of an item or service under Medicare or a state health care program. The ALJ also affirmed that the six-year exclusion imposed by the IG was not unreasonable based on the presence of one aggravating factor and the absence of any mitigating factors (Rebecca N. Dejos Cedro v. The Inspector General, DAB No. CR6714, Doc. No. C-25-245 (June 18, 2025)).

CONDITIONS OF PARTICIPATION—DAB DECISIONS: The ALJ affirmed that the Inspector General (IG) properly excluded the Provider from participation in Medicare, Medicaid, and all other federal health care programs for five years pursuant to section 1128(a)(1) of the Social Security Act because the Provider was convicted of criminal offenses related to the delivery of an item or service under a state health care program. The ALJ also affirmed that the five-year exclusion imposed by the IG was not unreasonable because the statute mandated a minimum five-year exclusion period. (Dorreetha Irby v. The Inspector General , DAB No. CR6718, Doc. No. C-25-377 (June 25, 2025)).

ADMINISTRATION OF MEDICARE/MEDICAID PROGRAMS—DAB DECISIONS: The ALJ affirmed that the CMS properly revoked the Providers enrollment and billing privileges in the Medicare program pursuant to 42C.F.R.424.535(a)(1) and (a)(9) because the Providers licenses to practice medicine in the states where the Provider practiced were revoked or suspended and the Provider failed to report these adverse legal actions to the CMS within 30 days. The ALJ also affirmed that the CMS properly placed the Provider on the Preclusion List and imposed a five-year reenrollment bar because the Providers underlying conduct was detrimental to the best interests of the Medicare program and its beneficiaries and because the ALJ lacked authority to review the length of the reenrollment bar (Ralph Thomas Reach, M.D. v. CMS, DAB No. CR6707, Doc. No. C-24-631 (June 10, 2025)).

ORGAN PROCUREMENT AND TRANSPLANTATION—OIG REPORTS: Psychosocial Characteristics and Their Association With Kidney Transplant Programs Waitlist Rates (OIG Report, No. OEI-01-23-00293 (Mar. 11, 2026)).

FOOD SAFETY—S.D.N.Y.: The court found that a consumer did not have standing to bring claims against a produce manufacturer after a recall of carrots because the consumer failed to specify when he bought the carrots or that he became ill from the carrots (Catalano v. Grimmway Enterprises, Inc., No. 7:24-cv-08817-NSR (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2026)).

SKILLED NURSING FACILITIES—DAB DECISIONS: The ALJ affirmed the CMSs determination that the Provider was not in substantial compliance with the Medicare participation requirements pursuant to 42 C.F.R.483.25(d)(1), (2) and 483.25(n)(1)-(4) because the Provider failed to maintain an environment free of accident hazards, provide adequate supervision to prevent foreseeable falls, and ensure the proper use and monitoring of bed rails, resulting in actual harm to a resident. The ALJ also affirmed that the CMS properly imposed a per-day civil money penalty of $1,530 because the Providers deficiencies constituted substantial noncompliance (Generations at Regency v. CMS, DAB No. CR6660, Doc. No. C-23-606 (Apr. 7, 2025)).

HEALTH CARE EMPLOYMENT ISSUES—GAO REPORTS: Health Care Workforce: Federal Grants Supporting Mental Health (GAO Report, No. GAO-26-107951 (Mar. 12, 2026)).

PRODUCTS LIABILITY (DRUGS)—N.D. Cal.: The court dismissed product liability claims against the manufacturers of Fluocinonide cream after a patient reported that the cream was used on her face and migrated to her eye and caused injuries (Doe v. Taro Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., No. 3:25-cv-07815-RFL (N.D. Cal. Mar. 16, 2026)).

ADULTERATION—N.D. Cal.: Consumer alleges that avocado oil product is adulterated with other oils (Smith v. Safeway Inc., No. 3:24-cv-07918-AMO (N.D. Cal. Mar. 9, 2026)).

PROGRAM INTEGRITY—DAB DECISIONS: The ALJ affirmed that the Inspector General (IG) properly demanded stipulated penalties in the amount of $22,000 pursuant to the terms of the Corporate Integrity Agreement (IA) because the Provider failed to timely and fully comply with the IAs annual reporting requirements. The ALJ also affirmed that the stipulated penalties were proper because the Provider remained noncompliant for at least 82 days and failed to demonstrate full and timely compliance with the IA (Azizulah Kamali, M.D. v. The Inspector General , DAB No. CR6655, Doc. No. C-24-437 (Apr. 2, 2025)).

MainStory: CaseDecisions DABDecisions GAOReports OIGReports AgencyNews ComplianceNews DrugNews CMSNews AdulterationNews AntikickbackNews CoPNews CredentialNews DrugBiologicNews FCANews FoodNews FoodSafetyNews FoodStandardsNews FraudNews EmploymentNews OrganNews PLDrugNews ProgramIntegrityNews QualityNews SNFNews