Skip to main content

Stephnie A. John

Associate

[email protected]

+1.212.692.6257

Share:

Stephnie focuses her practice on advising clients across the health care industry on regulatory, transactional, and compliance matters. She serves as regulatory counsel to private equity firms and other investors in transactions involving a range of health care targets, including health care systems and other health care providers, PBMs, pharmacies, nurse staffing companies, and laboratories. She regularly advises pharmacies, PBMs, third party payors, digital health companies, value-based contracting entities, and care providers on regulatory matters. With her previous experience at a state Medicaid agency and the Medicare Appeals Council, she is able to strategically advise clients on regulatory and compliance issues relating to Medicare and Medicaid.

Prior to joining Mintz, Stephnie was an attorney advisor at the Office of General Counsel of the DC Department of Health Care Finance. Stephnie provided DC’s Medicaid agency with legal and compliance counsel and defended it in administrative proceedings, including provider appeals of Medicaid payment suspensions based on allegations of fraud and pharmacy overpayment recoupments identified by state Medicaid audit. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Stephnie helped to ensure the agency’s compliance with the CARES Act. Earlier, Stephnie was an associate at Healthcare Legal Solutions, LLC, where she reviewed hospital and health care providers’ medical claims and billing practices, drafted administrative appeals on behalf of providers, and strategized with clients to ensure compliance with Medicare and Medicaid regulations and reduce payment denials.

While attending George Washington University School of Law, Stephnie was managing editor of the Federal Circuit Bar Journal. She also served as a legal extern for the Medicare Appeals Council, housed under the Departmental Appeals Board at the Department of Health and Human Services, and clerked for two law firms in the Washington metropolitan area.

Not admitted to practice law in New York.  Admitted to practice only in the District of Columbia.

viewpoints

A Mintz Health Care Roundtable: Current Trends in State Health Care Transaction Review and What to Expect in 2024

March 27, 2024 | Blog | By Stephnie John, Daniel Cody, Deborah Daccord, Karen Lovitch

States are increasingly exercising regulatory oversight of health care transactions by enacting laws requiring prior notice or approval of certain health care transactions. Currently, 15 states have enacted health care transaction review laws applicable to for-profit transactions. On Wednesday, March 20, 2024, Mintz members Daniel A. Cody, Deborah A. Daccord, and Karen S. Lovitch engaged in an insightful discussion with Lois Johnson, General Counsel of Massachusetts Health Policy Commission, to discuss the latest developments surrounding these laws and gain valuable insight from Ms. Johnson’s expertise, as Massachusetts was one of the first states to implement a health care transaction review process. The highlights of this informative conversation are summarized below, and the webinar can be viewed here.
Read more
IRA Update Viewpoints Thumbnail

Mintz IRA Update — Second Edition: Q1 2024

February 21, 2024 | Blog | By Rachel A. Alexander, Theresa Carnegie, Tara E. Dwyer, Madison Castle, Mitchell Clough, Xavier Hardy, Stephnie John, Bridgette Keller, Abdie Santiago, Hassan Shaikh

Read more
As the Mintz Health Law team welcomes the beginning of 2024, many of its members take a moment to reflect on the exciting growth of the Health Law Practice, opportunities to partner with clients on complex legal issues, and the celebration of numerous milestones.
Read more
On October 10, 2023, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) published another temporary rule extending the COVID-era telemedicine flexibilities that allow physicians and other prescribers to prescribe controlled substances without an in-person evaluation.  With just over a month to go before the expiration of the first set of flexibilities, the DEA announced that the telemedicine flexibilities, which have been in place since March 2020, will be extended through the end of 2024 in order to give the agency more time to consider feedback received in response to the proposed rule, which was announced in March of this year.  As a reminder, under the Ryan Haight Online Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act of 2008, providers may not prescribe controlled substances without an in-person visit, unless an exception applies.  The COVID public health emergency triggered one such exception, which lead to the telehealth flexibilities. 
Read more

Mintz IRA Update — Inaugural Edition

September 20, 2023 | Blog | By Theresa Carnegie, Tara E. Dwyer, Mitchell Clough, Xavier Hardy, Stephnie John, Bridgette Keller, Lauren Moldawer, Pat Ouellette, Hassan Shaikh

Read more

Transforming Primary Care: CMS Launches Making Care Primary (MCP) Model

August 8, 2023 | Blog | By Rachel Yount, David Gilboa, Stephnie John

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced a new primary care model—the Making Care Primary (MCP) Model—geared towards smaller, independent primary care practices and organizations that want to participate independently in value-based care initiatives. The MCP Model will be tested in eight states - Colorado, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, and Washington.
Read more
In a resounding unanimous 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court rejected the argument that a defendant’s subjective belief is irrelevant under the False Claims Act (FCA) when evaluating whether a defendant “knowingly” submitted a false claim to the government for payment. On June 1, 2023, the Court issued its highly anticipated opinion in the consolidated cases U.S. ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu, Inc. and U.S. ex rel. Proctor v. Safeway, Inc. (SuperValu) and addressed the question of whether a defendant is liable under the FCA if its conduct is consistent with an “objectively reasonable” interpretation of ambiguous statutory or regulatory language. Justice Thomas, writing for the Court, held that an “objectively reasonable” interpretation does not provide a complete legal defense to liability under the FCA. Rather, a defendant meets the FCA’s intent (scienter) requirement if the defendant’s subjective beliefs indicate it had knowledge that its submission of claims was “false or fraudulent,” regardless of whether the defendant’s conduct could be supported by a later “objectively reasonable” interpretation of the ambiguous legal or regulatory issue. Further, the Court articulated new standards for what might constitute “deliberate ignorance” or “reckless disregard” under the “knowledge” prong of the FCA.
Read more

Mintz Health Law: What We Are Grateful For

January 11, 2023 | Podcast | By Bridgette Keller

Bridgette Keller speaks with the Mintz Health Law team about what they are grateful for as they look back on a year of client service, mentorship, and working together as a team.
Read more
Read less

Recognition & Awards

  • Summer Public Interest Fellow, South Asian Bar Association (2015)

Read less

Involvement

  • Legal Counsel, Dil to Dil, a nonprofit organization dedicated to South Asian mental health advocacy
  • Member, American Health Law Association
Read less