DC Judge, Applying 'Loper Bright,' Dismisses Complaint in Medicare Drug-Classification Dispute
U.S. District Senior Judge Beryl A. Howell ruled that federal law “precludes the exercise of jurisdiction to review the agency’s classification of certain oral-only drugs as ‘renal dialysis services’ and its decision to identify [Ardelyx Inc.’s drug Xphozah] as qualifying for such classification.”
November 12, 2024 at 03:54 PM
4 minute read
What You Need to Know
- Latham & Watkins represented drugmaker Ardelyx Inc. in a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
- U.S. District Senior Judge Beryl A. Howell dismissed the complaint on jurisdictional grounds.
- Ardelyx is reviewing its appellate options.
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of a drug company.
U.S. District Senior Judge Beryl A. Howell for the District of Columbia ruled she has no jurisdiction to consider Massachusetts-based Ardelyx Inc.’s claims alleging HHS misclassified phosphate-lowering therapies in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.
Federal law—the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008—“precludes the exercise of jurisdiction to review the agency’s classification of certain oral-only drugs as ‘renal dialysis services’ and its decision to identify [Ardelyx’s PLT drug Xphozah] as qualifying for such classification,” Howell wrote in her memorandum opinion filed Nov. 8. “Accordingly, defendants’ motion is granted, requiring dismissal of this case.”
Latham & Watkins filed a complaint in July against President Joe Biden’s HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services alleging CMS violated the APA by changing Xphozah’s classification and Medicare reimbursement scheme.
Representing Ardelyx and two nonprofit advocacy organizations, Latham argued the Medicare reimbursement changes that go into effect in January 2025 are “arbitrary, capricious, contrary to law, in excess of statutory authority, and short of statutory right, and must therefore be set aside.”
U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves for the District of Columbia filed court papers asking the trial court to dismiss Latham’s complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
“Separate from their failure to demonstrate an irreparable economic injury,” U.S. attorneys argued in a brief, “Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunctive relief should be denied because the alleged imminent economic harm they ask this Court to redress is, in substantial part, self-inflicted. Ardelyx could have, but did not, seek to have the Medicare program make an add-on payment adjustment to End-Stage Renal Disease facilities when they use [Xphozah] to treat patients.”
Bound by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision overturning “Chevron deference,” Howell in her decision wrote the trial court “analysis does not defer to the agency’s interpretation of any of the statute’s provisions, even if ambiguity were found.”
Howell granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss and denied Latham’s preliminary injunction motion as moot, ruling the MIPPA statutes prevents judicial review of the claims.
Mike Raab, president and CEO of Ardelyx, issued a statement saying the company is “disappointed and saddened” by Howell’s decision.
“This will result in incredible harm to dialysis patients who, as a result of the bundled payment system, are unable to access the best care and medicine they require,” Raab said. “Dialysis patients are among those who have historically experienced poorer health outcomes due to negative social determinants of health. And, while addressing health disparities has been a stated goal for CMS, this policy moves us in the opposite direction, resulting in severely restricted access to important medications.”
Founded in October 2007, Ardelyx is the Massachusetts-based drugmaker of Xphozah, a phosphate-lowering therapy approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in October 2023 for treating chronic kidney disease patients on dialysis.
Ardelyx in its 2023 annual report said the government classifying Xphozah for reimbursements under Medicare Part B and no longer under Part D in 2025 could have a negative impact on the company’s revenues.
Ardelyx in a Nov. 8 press release said it is “currently reviewing the District Court’s decision and will consider all options related to the lawsuit.”
A CMS spokesperson said the federal agency also is reviewing the decision Tuesday.
Howell rendered her decision in Ardelyx v. Becerra, civil action No. 1:24-cv-02095.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWill GOP-Led Senate, House Move to Repeal Biden's Late Regulations as Law Provides?
US Supreme Court Weighs Federal Agencies' Duty Under National Environmental Policy Act
FDA Defends Rejection of Vape-Flavor Applications Before Sympathetic Supreme Court
'Nuclear Option'?: Eli Lilly Taps Big Law Firms in Federal Drug Pricing Dispute
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Public Notices/Calendars
- 2Wednesday Newspaper
- 3Decision of the Day: Qui Tam Relators Do Not Plausibly Claim Firm Avoided Tax Obligations Through Visa Applications, Circuit Finds
- 4Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-116
- 5Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250