Legal Opinion

United States v. EMD Serono, Inc.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided April 3, 2019No. CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-5594PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSavage, J.

In this qui tam action brought under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3727 - 33, and various state laws, relators SMSPF, LLC and Panzey Belgium Harris bring claims against pharmaceutical companies, EMD Serono, Inc., and Pfizer, Inc., and marketing consultants and specialists, Quintiles IMS Holdings, Inc.,1 and RXC Acquisition Company. They allege the defendants improperly engaged in "white coat marketing" and provided free nursing and reimbursement support services in violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b(b). The government, having completed its investigation and…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Heckler v. ChaneySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States Ex Rel. StevensSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Corley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  4. Hibbs v. WinnSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  5. Selective Service System v. Minnesota Public Interest Research GroupSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Health Choice Alliance, LLC v. Eli Lilly and Company, Inc.District Court, E.D. Texas · 2019
  2. NHCA-TEV, LLC v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS LTD.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2019
  3. POLANSKY V. EXECUTIVE HEALTH RESOURCES INC.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2019
  4. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. Brutus Trading, LLC v. Standard Chartered BankDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2020
  5. United States of America ex rel. John R. Borzilleri, M.D. v. Abbvie, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2019

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

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

Powered by the Exa API