Search for: "Arthrex Inc." Results 41 - 60 of 240
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Apr 2022, 5:05 am by David W.S. Lieberman
The Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits offering or accepting kickbacks intended to generate health care business. [read post]
25 Jan 2022, 8:13 am by Suzanne E. Durrell
Medical Device Company Arthrex Settles False Claims Act Case for $16 Million in November Arthrex, Inc., a Florida-based medical device maker primarily to the orthopedic surgery industry, paid the United States $16 million to resolve allegations brought by a WLC whistleblower client that Arthrex paid kickbacks to market two of its surgical products. [read post]
7 Dec 2021, 6:38 am by Neil Wilkof
Arthrex, Inc., which ruled that the PTO director may review and overrule the decisions of the patent judges of the PTAB. [read post]
15 Nov 2021, 1:16 pm by luiza
In the first settlement (last Monday), Florida-based medical device company Arthrex Inc. agreed to pay $16 million to settle government and whistleblower charges of paying kickbacks to a Colorado-based orthopedic surgeon. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 1:55 pm by David W.S. Lieberman
The United States has settled a federal False Claims Act qui tam case brought by a client of the Whistleblower Law Collaborative LLC against Arthrex, Inc., a Florida-based medical device maker primarily to the orthopedic surgery industry. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 1:25 pm by greggshapiro.admin
On November 8, 2021, the United States Attorney’s Office in Boston announced that Arthrex Inc., a large, privately-held medical device company, agreed to pay $16 million to resolve a False Claims Act qui tam case alleging that Arthrex used the guise of royalties to pay millions of dollars in kickbacks to a prominent Colorado orthopedic surgeon, David Millett. [read post]
27 Oct 2021, 5:15 am by Dennis Crouch
Chevron Oronite Company LLC, No. 21-350 (mid-Arthrex issue, potential for GVR with instructions for PTO Director to place his imprint on the decision); and Bongiorno v. [read post]
15 Oct 2021, 4:15 am by Eileen McDermott
On October 8, a motion was filed on behalf of K.Mizra LLC asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) to review a PTAB institution decision on the ground that Apple Inc. v. [read post]
15 Oct 2021, 4:15 am by Eileen McDermott
On October 8, a motion was filed on behalf of K.Mizra LLC asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) to review a PTAB institution decision on the ground that Apple Inc. v. [read post]