1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Fraud, Wast and Abuse Guidance for Medicare Part D

Fraud, Wast and Abuse Guidance for Medicare Part D

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.24.06

The Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit – Part D – imposes a legal requirement on Part D contractors to adopt a fraud, waste, and abuse (“FWA”) plan. On February 8, 2006, CMS issued a sixty-three page draft of FWA guidance to be contained in Chapter 9 of CMS’ Prescription Drug Benefit Manual, significantly enhancing the agency’s initial eight-page draft issued in June 2005. On February 23, 2006, the Health Care practice group at Crowell & Moring LLP conducted an online webinar in response to the new draft requirements. Crowell & Moring's webcast, aimed to quickly arm Plan Sponsors as well as downstream participants in the Part D benefit with what they need to know about the new requirements, discussed how to augment compliance and internal audit resources, develop new employee and subcontractor training programs, adopt scores of new "required" written policies and procedures, draft new contract clauses for Part D subcontractors, and enhance internal procedures for handling internal and external reports of potential Sponsor, provider, and beneficiary misconduct. To view a copy of the presentation, please click here.

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....