Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

United States v. Bourseau

United States v. Bourseau

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

April 9, 2008, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California; July 14, 2008, Filed

No. 06-56741, No. 06-56743

Opinion

 [*1161]  BEEZER, Circuit Judge:

Robert I. Bourseau ("Bourseau"), RIB Medical Management Services, Inc. ("RIB"), Dr. Rudra Sabaratnam ("Sabaratnam") and Navatkuda, Inc. ("Navatkuda") (collectively, "Appellants"), appeal the district court's judgment holding them jointly and severally liable to the United States ("government") for violations of the False Claims Act ("FCA"), 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733. We affirm.

 [*1162]  I

The parties agree that the underlying facts are not in dispute.  [**2] The government brought this case on behalf of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("Medicare") against two psychiatric hospital operators, Bourseau and Sabaratnam, and their single-employee corporations, RIB and Navatkuda, for fraud in the context of the Medicare reimbursement process.

A. The Medicare Reimbursement Process

Medicare reimburses hospitals, including psychiatric hospitals, for the reasonable costs of services that the hospitals provide to Medicare beneficiaries. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395d(c), 1395k, 1395x(v)(1)(A); 42 C.F.R. § 410.27. Medicare reimburses such providers only for the portion of costs that relate to Medicare patients. 42 U.S.C. § 1395x(v)(1)(A); 42 C.F.R. § 413.50. Medicare contracts with private insurance companies, known as fiscal intermediaries, to facilitate the reimbursement process. 42 U.S.C. § 1395h; 42 C.F.R. § 413.64. Intermediaries pay providers an interim amount periodically throughout the year that is based on estimated treatment costs for Medicare patients. 42 U.S.C. § 1395g(e); 42 C.F.R. §§ 413.60, 413.64. At the end of the year, providers submit a final accounting of their actual costs  [**3] for the year to their intermediaries in a document called a cost report. 42 C.F.R. § 413.20.

In order to reimburse providers for their Medicare expenses as quickly as possible, intermediaries make an initial retroactive adjustment to the interim payments as soon as they receive the providers' cost reports. 42 C.F.R. § 413.64(f)(2); Provider Reimbursement Manual ("PRM"), Pt. 1 § 2408.2. In making the initial retroactive adjustment, intermediaries accept costs as they are reported on a cost report, except for obvious errors and inconsistencies. 42 C.F.R. § 413.64(f)(2); PRM, Pt. 1 § 2408.2. The cost reports are later subject to an audit. 42 C.F.R. § 413.64(f)(2); PRM, Pt. 1 § 2408.2. After intermediaries audit a cost report, intermediaries determine the providers' and Medicare's final liability to one another. 42 C.F.R. § 413.64(f)(2); PRM, Pt. 1 § 2408.2. In other words, an intermediary will use a cost report to determine whether a provider, or Medicare, is owed money based on the difference between the interim payments already paid to the provider and the actual amount that the intermediary determines was actually due to the provider. 42 C.F.R. §§ 405.1803, 413.9(b)(1), 413.60, 413.64(f).  [**4] Recoupment of any overpayments made to a provider is made notwithstanding any request for a hearing to review an intermediary's determination. 42 C.F.R. § 405.1803(c).

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

531 F.3d 1159 *; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 14891 **

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROBERT I. BOURSEAU; RIB MEDICAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., a California corporation, Defendants-Appellants, and RUDRA SABARATNAM; NAVATKUDA, INC., a California corporation, Defendants. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROBERT I. BOURSEAU; RIB MEDICAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., a California corporation, Defendants, and RUDRA SABARATNAM; NAVATKUDA, INC., a California corporation, Defendants-Appellants.

Subsequent History: US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Bourseau v. United States, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 1725 (U.S., Mar. 2, 2009)

Prior History:  [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. D.C. No. CV-03-00907-RTB. D.C. No. CV-03-00907-RTB. Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding.

United States v. Bourseau, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88016 (S.D. Cal., Dec. 1, 2006)

CORE TERMS

intermediary, provider, reimbursement, costs, district court, false claim, legal fees, overpayments, damages, regulations, treble damages, interim, disputed item, decrease, rental expense, patient care, falsity, additional space, management fees, false statement, nonallowable, knowingly, inflated, audit, rates, repay, reckless disregard, obligation to pay, civil penalty, calculation

Civil Procedure, Appeals, Standards of Review, Clearly Erroneous Review, Governments, Federal Government, Claims By & Against, De Novo Review, Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Allocation, Public Health & Welfare Law, Providers, Reimbursement, General Overview, Provider Reimbursement Manual, Constitutional Law, Bill of Rights, Fundamental Rights, Cruel & Unusual Punishment