1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Michelle L. Chipetine

Michelle L. Chipetine

Counsel
Counsel
bWNoaXBldGluZUBjcm93ZWxsLmNvbQ==
VCardLinkedIn
VCardLinkedIn

Areas of Focus

Overview

Michelle Chipetine is a counsel in Crowell & Moring’s New York office and a member of the firm’s Health Care and Intellectual Property groups.

Michelle’s practice focuses on patent and health care litigation and counseling health care entities and not-for-profit corporations on a wide range of regulatory, transactional, and corporate matters. Michelle works with all types of health care entities, including hospitals, pharmacies, laboratories, and health plans, seeking to comply with federal and state laws and regulations, including those related to fraud and abuse, telemedicine, licensing, and reimbursement.

Before joining Crowell & Moring, Michelle graduated cum laude from Fordham University School of Law, where she was actively involved with Fordham’s Neuroscience and Law Center. Michelle also studied neuroscience at Vassar College, where she graduated cum laude.

Career & Education

|

    • Vassar College, B.A., cum laude, neuroscience, 2015
    • Fordham University School of Law, J.D., cum laude, 2018
    • Vassar College, B.A., cum laude, neuroscience, 2015
    • Fordham University School of Law, J.D., cum laude, 2018

    • New York
    • New York

Michelle's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 02.21.25

First Circuit Clarifies “Resulting From” Standard Under Anti-Kickback Statute, Reshaping False Claims Act Litigation

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued a pivotal ruling earlier this week, finding that in order to establish falsity in a False Claims Act (“FCA”) case premised on Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) liability, the kickback must have been the “but-for” cause of the submission of the claim. The court’s decision hinged on the meaning of the phrase “resulting from” within the 2010 amendment to the AKS, which provided that a claim that includes items or services “resulting from” a violation of the AKS constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the FCA. The meaning of “resulting from” for purposes of establishing such FCA liability has been hotly debated by courts. The First Circuit now joins the Sixth and Eighth Circuits in adopting this stricter but-for standard, while the Third Circuit has opted for a much looser approach....

View All Insights

Representative Matters

  • Secured a significant victory (a preliminary injunction against patent infringement through trial) on behalf of Lonza Walkersville, Inc. against Israel-based Adva Biotechnology Ltd. in a case involving point-of-care cell-therapy technology.

Michelle's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 02.21.25

First Circuit Clarifies “Resulting From” Standard Under Anti-Kickback Statute, Reshaping False Claims Act Litigation

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued a pivotal ruling earlier this week, finding that in order to establish falsity in a False Claims Act (“FCA”) case premised on Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) liability, the kickback must have been the “but-for” cause of the submission of the claim. The court’s decision hinged on the meaning of the phrase “resulting from” within the 2010 amendment to the AKS, which provided that a claim that includes items or services “resulting from” a violation of the AKS constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the FCA. The meaning of “resulting from” for purposes of establishing such FCA liability has been hotly debated by courts. The First Circuit now joins the Sixth and Eighth Circuits in adopting this stricter but-for standard, while the Third Circuit has opted for a much looser approach....

View All Insights

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 02.21.25

First Circuit Clarifies “Resulting From” Standard Under Anti-Kickback Statute, Reshaping False Claims Act Litigation

Blog Post | 01.30.25

FDA Clarifies Enforcement Policy Around Communications of Scientific Information on Unapproved Uses of Drugs and Medical Devices

Blog Post | 11.05.24

Stringent Requirements for Pleading Fraud Under Rule 9(b).

Blog Post | 11.01.24

General Allegations Without Representative Examples Are Insufficient to Survive a Motion to Dismiss
|

View All Insights

Practices

Michelle's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 02.21.25

First Circuit Clarifies “Resulting From” Standard Under Anti-Kickback Statute, Reshaping False Claims Act Litigation

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued a pivotal ruling earlier this week, finding that in order to establish falsity in a False Claims Act (“FCA”) case premised on Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) liability, the kickback must have been the “but-for” cause of the submission of the claim. The court’s decision hinged on the meaning of the phrase “resulting from” within the 2010 amendment to the AKS, which provided that a claim that includes items or services “resulting from” a violation of the AKS constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the FCA. The meaning of “resulting from” for purposes of establishing such FCA liability has been hotly debated by courts. The First Circuit now joins the Sixth and Eighth Circuits in adopting this stricter but-for standard, while the Third Circuit has opted for a much looser approach....

View All Insights