HHS-OIG, ASTP/ONC, and CMS are now running an enforcement architecture for information blocking that Appropriate Use Criteria never had, and the prior auth piece I wrote two days ago may have underestimated it.
"Won the witness" is directionally right, but Hensel isn't a one-off. He's the third defendant to exit by handing Epic a story that points at someone else.
1. GuardDog admitted and pointed up the chain.
2. RavillaMed tried to sever from Baker.
3. Now SelfRx denies the volume but still leaves Unit 387 and Health Gorilla holding the keys.
Epic is dividing the defendants and forcing infighting to go up to the bigger target. That is working, but a big hurdle remains - the motion to dismiss on the procedural grounds
I'm right here: https://healthapiguy.substack.com/p/epic-v-health-gorilla-prisoners-dilemma?utm_source=publication-search
Any thoughts on my interpretation of the SelfRx and Health Gorilla cases?
"Won the witness" is directionally right, but Hensel isn't a one-off. He's the third defendant to exit by handing Epic a story that points at someone else.
1. GuardDog admitted and pointed up the chain.
2. RavillaMed tried to sever from Baker.
3. Now SelfRx denies the volume but still leaves Unit 387 and Health Gorilla holding the keys.
Epic is dividing the defendants and forcing infighting to go up to the bigger target. That is working, but a big hurdle remains - the motion to dismiss on the procedural grounds