Legal Opinion

United States ex rel. Bierman v. Orthofix International, N.V.

District Court, D. Massachusetts

Decided April 11, 2016No. CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-10557-RWZPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

ZOBEL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff-Relator Jeffrey Bierman has alleged that DJO1 defrauded Medicare by fraudulently selling bone-growth stimulation devices. Following a previous round of summary judgment,- see Docket # 358, Bierman’s sole remaining theory of liability under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 et seq. — and a host of state and local analogs2 — is that DJO trained physicians to recommend inflated estimated lengths of need for its device. In support of this theory, Bierman has marshalled two experts, Yadin David and Jonathan Williams, who…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
  3. Barnhart v. Peabody Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2003
  4. Prescott v. HigginsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2008
  5. United States Ex Rel. Loughren v. Unum GroupCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2010

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Marsteller v. TiltonDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API