1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |DOJ Antitrust Settlement Requires North Carolina Physician Group To Disband

DOJ Antitrust Settlement Requires North Carolina Physician Group To Disband

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.15.02

On December 13th, the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice announced that it will require Mountain Health Care, an independent physicians organization headquartered in Asheville, North Carolina, to cease its operations and dissolve. The Department said that under a proposed settlement, Mountain Health Care will cease negotiating and contracting with health care plans on behalf of its participating physicians, a practice DOJ said resulted in consumers paying increased prices to Mountain Health Care's physician members for health care services.

Click here for the DOJ complaint, stipulation to final judgment, and competitive impact statement.

According to the DOJ complaint filed in federal district court in connection with the settlement, Mountain Health Care restrained price and other forms of competition among physicians in Western North Carolina by adopting a uniform fee schedule for its physicians. Mountain Health Care agreed to contracts with managed care purchasers that incorporated the collectively set fees. These actions resulted in higher rates charged to health plans leading to higher health costs for ultimate consumers, DOJ said.

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25

Defining Claim Terms by Implication: Lexicography Lessons from Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation

Claim construction is a key stage of most patent litigations, where the court must decide the meaning of any disputed terms in the patent claims.  Generally, claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning except under two circumstances: (1) when the patentee acts as its own lexicographer and sets out a definition for the term; and (2) when the patentee disavows the full scope of the term either in the specification or during prosecution.  Thorner v. Sony Comput. Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012).  The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. highlights that patentees can act as their own lexicographers through consistent, interchangeable usage of terms across the specification, effectively defining terms by implication....