Frequently Asked Questions
Can I join HLA's lawsuit against Optum Rx for PBM audit termination?
Unfortunately, PBM provider manuals contain provisions that prohibit "class actions," meaning the joining of multiple plaintiffs against a defendant in one complaint.
Am I able to file a lawsuit against Optum Rx for PBM audit violations?
Yes, you are entitled to file a lawsuit in federal or state court to hold the PBM accountable for PBM audit violations. Ultimately, however, lawsuits should be a remedy of last resort if PBM audit negotiations fail.
What are the costs associated with filing a PBM audit lawsuit?
Legal fees and expenses vary depending on the nature of the lawsuit and claims involved. Some PBM audit lawsuits may be resolved quickly, whereas others may take longer or be referred to arbitration. Finally, certain claims may be eligible for "contingent fee" arrangements, particularly if you are a specialty pharmacy with high DIR claw-backs.
Just days after we sued Optum in federal court in the Northern District of Texas, Optum immediately released approximately $250,000 in reimbursement that it had unlawfully withheld from our client for more than six months on the basis of non-existent PBM audit discrepancies. The fact that we had to sue Optum to obtain this relief serves as another example of the extent to which PBMs abuse their market position at the expense of network pharmacies.
Texas Lawsuit to Stop PBM Audit Violations is Continuing
Although Optum has now returned our client's money, we do not intend to stop there. We have filed an Amended Complaint that alleges that United Health is applying different PBM audit metrics and standards to pharmacies that service beneficiaries of United Healthcare's Part C Medicare Advantage capitated plans than other network pharmacies.
If you have been targeted for a PBM audit focused on claims for Medicare Advantage AARP members, or other United Healthcare sponsored plans, our experienced healthcare attorneys are available to defend the PBM audit.
Texas PBM Reform Permits Mail-Order Deliveries
In our case, Optum's PBM audit alleged that certain of the pharmacy's claims were invalid because they had been delivered by mail to patients located hundreds of miles away.
In Texas, however, PBM reform laws expressly forbid payors and PBMs from barring mail-order delivery. Accordingly, if you are a Texas provider and have been targeted for a PBM audit based on mail order deliveries, we can help you hold PBMs like Optum accountable to their legal obligations.
PBMs are Prohibited from Withholding Reimbursement
Many laws prohibit PBMs from refusing to reimburse "clean claims" within certain time periods. In our case, Optum withheld reimbursement due the pharmacy in violation of such "prompt pay" laws for more than six months. Once we sued Optum, it was forced to comply with the law.
Nonetheless, there may be scenarios in which a PBM is permitted by the terms of its agreements to hold funds pending completion of an audit. The extent to which a PBM may withhold reimbursement due and owing on certain claims pending an audit of other claims is highly dependent on the facts and legal obligations at play.
Nationwide PBM Audit Specialists
Although our lawsuit against Optum was filed in Dallas, Texas, our firm assists pharmacies and providers nationwide to defend PBM and payor audits. If you have been selected for a PBM audit, are appealing the results of that audit, or are facing network termination as a result of discrepant audit findings, our PBM audit defense specialists are available to help. Contact us today for a free consultation.
MORE ARTICLES BY CATEGORY
Health Law Alliance Secures Major Victory as Federal Court Dismisses Lawsuit Against Independent Pharmacies
Health Law Alliance secured a major win for independent pharmacies with the dismissal of Cardinal Health’s lawsuit, exposing it as a baseless attempt to intimidate smaller providers. This outcome reinforces the firm’s commitment to protecting healthcare businesses from corporate overreach.
Read More >>DOJ’s 2025 National Health Care Fraud Takedown: What it Means for Telehealth Providers
The DOJ’s 2025 National Health Care Fraud Takedown charged 324 people in schemes totaling $14 billion in intended losses, including $1.17 billion tied to telemedicine and genetic‑testing fraud that implicated 49 defendants - signaling the government’s continued crack‑down on virtual‑care abuses. The surge in criminal and civil actions, coupled with CMS suspensions and the new DOJ‑HHS False Claims Act Working Group, warns telehealth providers to rigorously audit their compliance practices or risk severe penalties and exclusion from federal programs.
Read More >>Telehealth Audit Season: OIG Found 7 Percent Error Rate in Pandemic-Era E/M Billing
A 2024 OIG study found that 7% of E/M services billed during the pandemic were noncompliant with Medicare billing requirements. We break down OIG’s findings and explain what they mean in an era where RPM audits are on the rise.
Read More >>Health Law Alliance Earns Reinstatement for DME Supplier Whose Medicare Billing Privileges Were Unjustly Revoked
Due to Health Law Alliance’s advocacy, a prominent DME vendor in Texas had their billing privileges reinstated this week, without having to jump through the arduous, costly hoops of a fair hearing in front of an Administrative Law Judge or a Departmental Appeals Board review.
Read More >>
