Major Victory on Medicare ALJ Hearing Backlog

Major Victory on Medicare ALJ Hearing Backlog

NAAOP

9/21/2016

On September 19, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
declined to delay proceedings in the ALJ backlog suit filed by the American
Hospital Association (AHA) against the Secretary of Health and Human
Services (HHS), Silvia Burwell. The court gave strong signals that it will
likely order the Department of HHS to comply with the 90-day statutory
deadline to decide Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) appeals, but stopped short
of doing so in its opinion. Instead, it called for a status conference with
the litigants to discuss the matter further on October 3rd.

 

AHA filed suit in 2014 against the Secretary of HHS, seeking a writ of
mandamus, which is an order directing a government official to comply with
a duty. Here, the duty is to decide ALJ appeals within 90 days as required
by the Medicare statute. In December 2014, the court dismissed AHA's suit.
The court believed at that time that the extensive delays in ALJ decisions
should be addressed by HHS and Congress, not the courts. AHA appealed to the
D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

 

The D.C. Circuit reversed the district court. The D.C. Circuit held that AHA
satisfied the core requirements for mandamus jurisdiction because hospitals
have a clear right to ALJ decisions in 90 days; the Secretary has a clear
duty to decide ALJ appeals in 90 days; and hospitals [as well as all other
providers] have no adequate alternative remedy other than mandamus. The D.C.
Circuit noted that the ALJ backlog is having a real impact on human health
and welfare because some providers are admitting fewer cases that are likely
to be targeted by Recovery Audit Contractors (RACs). The D.C. Circuit
remanded to the district court, however, to determine whether Congress and
the Secretary are making significant progress toward solving the ALJ
backlog.

 

The Secretary's first action on remand was to request that the district
court stay-delay-proceedings for seventeen months, until September 30, 2017,
arguing that the agency's initiatives and legislation pending in Congress
would clear the backlog without judicial intervention. AHA opposed the stay
under the theory that the Secretary's initiatives would actually result in
an increase in the ALJ backlog unless Congress provides substantial
additional funding, which is unlikely. Although this case was brought by the
American Hospital Association, the ultimate decision of the court in this
case will apply equally to all providers and suppliers who serve Medicare
patients, including orthotists and prosthetists.

 

On September 19, 2016, the district court denied the Secretary's motion to
stay. Although the court did not formally decide whether to order the
Secretary to comply with the deadline, the judge did weigh factors for and
against the issuance of a mandamus order when analyzing whether to grant the
stay. In other words, the judge was clear that the outcome of the motion
would indicate whether or not he would grant the writ of mandamus. In the
Secretary's favor, he noted the intrusiveness of a writ of mandamus and the
Secretary's assurances that solving the backlog is a high priority. The
court also cited Congress's awareness of the ALJ delay.

 

Ultimately, the District Court determined that the factors in favor of a
writ of mandamus outweigh the factors against. The court agreed with AHA
that the Secretary's current initiatives would not solve the ALJ backlog and
would actually result in it growing over time. The court emphasized that
significant progress toward a solution cannot simply mean that things get
worse more slowly than they would otherwise. The court also faulted the
Secretary for not exercising greater control over the RAC program.

 

The court concurred that Congress is unlikely to solve the backlog. The
court pointed out that the House and Senate Budget Committees have refused
to hold hearings on the President's 2017 budget, which would provide
significant additional funding for ALJs. The court also stated that lack of
action on the AFIRM Act to date shows that this bill is unlikely to relieve
the backlog in the near term.

 

Analysis

 

For all these reasons, the court denied the motion to stay, and at the same
time, the court strongly implied that it will order HHS to comply with the
ALJ deadline. The court stated, however, that it cannot simply waive a
magic wand to eliminate the backlog. The court scheduled a status
conference for October 3, 2016 to discuss how to proceed. NAAOP will
attend that status conference and provide our members with an update
following that conference.

While this decision will not solve the ALJ backlog overnight, it is a very
important decision that will place tremendous pressure on CMS to
meaningfully address the over 750,000 cases it has pending at the Office of
Medicare Hearings and Appeals. This means that O&P practitioners and
facilities that have Medicare claims pending at OMHA will likely begin to
see some relief from the lengthy delays in getting their ALJ appeals heard
and decided. However, the question of when this will occur still remains
uncertain. We will be closely monitoring this situation as developments
occur.

 

 

 

 

Please visit our website at: www.naaop.org

 

NAAOP

1501 M Street, NW

7th Floor

Washington, DC 20005-1700

e-mail: <Email Address Redacted>

(800) 622-6740

(202) 624-0064 Phone

(202) 785-1756 Fax

www.naaop.org