Case Result: United States Vs Bothra – $450M Acquittal
Our federal criminal defense team helped secure a victory in the United States vs. Bothra case, equaling a $450M Acquittal. Here’s how they..
Attorney Laith Quasem of Chapman Law Group was recently featured in a Stateline article examining the federal government’s expanding efforts to combat Medicaid fraud across all 50 states.
The article, titled “In Medicaid Fraud Crackdown, Feds Now Looking to Audit All 50 States,” describes a significant shift toward more uniform, nationwide scrutiny of state Medicaid programs and participating providers.
According to the report, federal officials are intensifying their focus on identifying fraud, waste, and abuse within Medicaid by requiring all 50 states to undergo increased scrutiny and auditing. This initiative represents a notable escalation from prior efforts that largely targeted specific states or high-risk areas.
As federal regulators increase oversight, healthcare providers may see:
While the goal is to protect program integrity, expanded audits can also create operational strain for legitimate practices, especially when payment disruptions or enrollment actions occur early in the process.
In the article, Laith offers his perspective on the increasingly aggressive federal enforcement tactics being used against healthcare providers. He notes that simply withholding federal funds from states may not effectively reduce fraud and could instead create unintended consequences for legitimate providers and patient access to care.
“I truly believe CMS is really abusing its discretion right now, and they’re revoking and suspending, but asking questions later,” Quasem said.
He emphasizes that healthcare enforcement must strike a careful balance between fraud prevention and preserving access to essential medical services. “It’s not OK during a crackdown to just put providers out of business without a credible allegation of fraud,” he explained.
Laith further exposed the real-world impact of these actions, adding, “Let’s say you’re a hospice, right? What do you do if you’re not getting paid? You’re not going to be able to keep the doors open. What do you do with your patients?”
Providers can reduce risk by taking proactive steps, including:
As enforcement efforts grow, the risk to medical practices nationwide also grows. Providers should be investing early on in developing robust healthcare compliance programs, self-audits, and training for staff, all under the guidance of specialized legal counsel. And if you find yourself under investigation by the DEA, OIG, or CMS, it is important that providers know that the first thing they should do is retain federal criminal defense counsel that has a niche in healthcare. They can help navigate you through the process, while avoiding any pitfalls that could make the situation worse.
At Chapman Law Group, we have extensive experience guiding providers through government investigations, audits, compliance development, and fraud claims. With over $550 million saved and 150+ acquittals nationwide, our specialized team of healthcare fraud defense attorneys works with our compliance and licensing teams to help ensure you are protected during and after the matter is resolved. So, if you have any concerns regarding a potential or current Medicare or Medicaid investigation into you or your practice, contact us for a free confidential consultation, and speak to a real attorney today.
"*" indicates required fields
Laith Quasem
Associate Attorney
Professional Licensing & Regulatory Affairs, Healthcare Compliance, Federal Criminal Defense
Seattle Office (Satellite)
Washington
Phone: (877) 234-5911
Our federal criminal defense team helped secure a victory in the United States vs. Bothra case, equaling a $450M Acquittal. Here’s how they..
Faced with two counts of Unlawful Distribution Causing Death, among other charges, the White Collar Defense team cleared the hefty charges without any additional jail time.
A Medicare plan administrator sought $250,000 from an ophthalmology practice after reimbursing incorrectly, but the arbitrator rejected the argument, calling its fee schedule “incomprehensible.”