A federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., heard arguments last month in a case involving the legality of the 340B program definition of "patient."

340B Patient Definition Is at the Heart of Case Debated Before Federal Appeals Court

An attorney for a South Carolina health center asked a federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., last month to reverse a lower court decision that left the longstanding 340B program definition of “patient” in effect—a definition that the health center says is at odds with the 340B statute’s actual requirements.

Please Login or Become a Paid Subscriber to View this Content

If you are already a paid subscriber, please follow the steps below.
If you are not yet a paid subscriber, please Subscribe now.
For questions about subscriptions or technical assistance, please contact Reshma Eggleston at reshma.eggleston@340breport.com.
« Read Previous Read Next »
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

*Sign up for news summaries and alerts from 340B Report