Hope is the immediate past Chair of the firm’s Health Care Enforcement Defense Practice. She has also served on the firm’s Pro Bono Committee and Policy Committee.
Hope defends and resolves large, multifaceted federal and state investigations arising under criminal and civil statutes barring, among other things, the submission of false claims and the provision of remuneration to induce referrals. In connection with such cases, Hope negotiates and structures global settlements with the US Department of Justice and its US Attorneys’ Offices and state Attorneys' General Offices as well as corporate integrity agreements with the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General.
Many of the cases that she has handled have arisen as a result of qui tam cases filed by whistleblowers, under federal and state False Claims Acts. Hope also develops and implements compliance programs and advises clients in connection with voluntary disclosures to the government. Hope defends administrative actions initiated by federal and state agencies, including recoupment actions and proceedings involving licensure and certification. She has a comprehensive understanding of the Medicare and Medicaid programs and the rules governing reimbursement. In her work before the US Congress on behalf of clients, Hope has supported enactment of statutes including the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments and the Stark self-referral bans.
She also represents health care providers, product manufacturers, payors, and investors, and specializes in statutory and regulatory issues affecting the provision of health care services. Her practice includes counseling, structuring, and litigating fraud and abuse issues as well as reimbursement matters.
Hope frequently speaks on topics of interest to health care providers, payors, and product manufacturers. She also has written extensively on issues confronting health care providers.
- Represented a diagnostics company in a national criminal and civil investigation involving multiple US Attorneys’ Offices and state Attorneys' General Offices. The investigation involved alleged kickback issues and billing violations.
- Defended a physician, from a Southeastern state, in a broad-based False Claims Act investigation alleging kickback issues.
- Defended a publicly traded medical device company in connection with the alleged failure to substantiate marketing and promotional claims.
- Represented a clinical laboratory in connection with a False Claims Act investigation, arising from a qui tam case, alleging issues with the manner in which specimens were obtained and transported to the laboratory prior to testing. The government declined the case and both the relator and government dismissed the complaint with prejudice.
- Represented four specialty laboratories in False Claims Act investigations in connection with the payment of processing and handling fees for specimen collection.
The Supreme Court’s SuperValu Decision on the “Knowingly” Element in the False Claims Act: Protecting Against Liability When There is Regulatory Ambiguity
June 14, 2023 | Blog | By Laurence Freedman, Hope Foster, Stephnie John
February 24, 2021 | | By Eoin Beirne, Brian Dunphy, Hope Foster, Karen Lovitch
May 13, 2020 | Blog | By Hope Foster, Karen Lovitch, Joseph Price, Sahir Surmeli
Part Five of the COVID-19 Roadmap Series: Ensuring a Safe Workplace - COVID-19 Screening and Testing
May 6, 2020 | Blog | By Nicole Rivers, Michael Arnold, Karen Lovitch, Hope Foster, Cynthia Larose
May 5, 2020 | Blog | By Joanne Hawana, Hope Foster
April 29, 2020 | Blog | By Hope Foster, Joanne Hawana
Only days before those stories ran, news outlets reported that Great Britain had paid $20 million to purchase antibody tests from China but, upon their arrival in Great Britain, those tests were found not to work. On April 26, 2020, the front page story in The New York Times headlined that “Testing Remains Scarce as States Weigh Reopening.”
Day after day, we have read conflicting stories about lab testing: do we have sufficient capacity and capability or do we not? If we do not, why don’t we? We have seen an alphabet soup of federal agencies named as being involved with clinical labs and working towards a solution to the many issues that have been raised. Having worked with labs for decades, we thought we would explore these really important questions. Which agency is responsible for what, and what are they doing? Every day we receive questions like these, and we thought that we would share what we have learned.
Practical Tips and Guidance for Understanding and Using HHS's Stark Law Blanket Waivers and the OIG’s Policy Statement About Them
April 21, 2020 | Blog | By Samantha Kingsbury, Hope Foster
April 13, 2020 | Blog | By Hope Foster
The very next day, the United States Attorney’s Office in San Antonio, Texas charged 39 year-old Christopher Perez with allegedly perpetuating a COVID-19-related hoax by posting a false threat on Facebook in which he claimed to have paid someone to spread COVID-19 at grocery stores in Texas. These prompt actions to implement Attorney General William Barr’s March 16 call to prioritize the detection, investigation, and detection of all criminal conduct related to the COVID-19 pandemic caused us to wonder what the federal government is doing about enforcement. The answer is: a lot.
The VALID Act, Aiming to Reform the Regulation of Diagnostic Products, Is Finally Introduced in Congress
March 12, 2020 | Blog
February 20, 2019 | Article | By Hope Foster, Kevin McGinty, Randy Jones, Jane Haviland, Yarazel Mejorado
News & Press
Mintz Practice Groups and Attorneys Garner Top Rankings in 2020 Edition of The Legal 500 United States
June 12, 2020
May 03, 2018
January 26, 2016
January 25, 2016
January 22, 2016
Events & Speaking
View the Webinar Recording
American Bar Association
The Cosmopolitan Las Vegas Hotel Las Vegas, NV
Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Washington, DC
Recognition & Awards
- Best Lawyers in America: Health Care Law (2011-2024)
- Chambers USA: Nationwide – Healthcare: Regulatory & Litigation
- Included on the Washington DC Super Lawyers: Health Care list (2012-2020)
- Recognized by The Legal 500 United States for Healthcare: Service Providers (2018-2020, 2022-2023)
- Chambers USA: District of Columbia (Band 1) – Healthcare (2009-2023)
- Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent
- Nightingale’s Healthcare News: Outstanding Healthcare Fraud and Compliance Lawyer (2008, 2010)
- Member, American Health Lawyers Association
- Member, District of Columbia Bar Association
- Member, American Bar Association (ABA)
- Member, ABA White Collar Crime Committee
- Member, ABA Health Care Committee
- Member, ABA Antitrust Committee
- Member, ABA Subcommittee on Health Care Fraud and Abuse