Drug manufacturer Eli Lilly has filed suit against four companies involved in making, prescribing, and/or selling compounded versions of its weight loss and diabetes drugs ZEPBOUND® and MOUNJARO®. Lilly’s drugs, injected under the skin, are the only FDA-approved medicines containing tirzepatide in the United States.
Two complaints, filed April 23 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, contend that the founders and chief executive officers of Mochi Health Corp. (“Mochi Health”) and Fella Health exerted control over multiple affiliated entities, including medical groups, in violation of California law prohibiting unlicensed individuals and corporations from practicing medicine (generally known as the “Corporate Practice of Medicine” or “CPOM” laws). The plaintiffs allege unfair competition and false advertising under state law and the Lanham Act; and assert state CPOM claims through supplemental and/or diversity jurisdiction.
This latest development on the drug compounding front comes at a time when states are keeping a sharp eye on private investment in the health care space—increasingly proposing legislation to strengthen CPOM laws and also increase oversight on corporate transactions involving health care entities. The majority of U.S. states have some form of CPOM restriction, and some, including Oregon, Texas, and Washington, are considering taking steps advocates say will strengthen theirs—with proposals, for example, to prevent private equity groups or hedge funds from interfering with health care decisions and limiting or eliminating common forms of affiliation with professional medical practices.
A new year brings about new legislation. Given the recent trend of health care transactions coming under increased scrutiny at the state level, EBG has released its map summarizing states that already have laws regulating health care transactions. As legislatures reconvene around the country, there continues to be regulatory scrutiny of health care transactions and private equity investment in health care. Below is a brief summary of recently proposed legislation.
California
On February 12, 2025, the California Senate introduced SB 351, which is remarkably similar to AB 3129, a bill the EBG team wrote about extensively in 2024 and that Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed in September 2024. The proposed legislation has three key components: (i) it adds new defined terms, including “hedge fund” and “private equity group,” in an attempt to capture all parties involved with Management Service Organizations (“MSOs”) and Dental Service Organizations (“DSOs”); (ii) it provides a list of prohibitions for any “private equity group” or “hedge fund” that is “involved in any manner with a physician or dental practice doing business in the state; and (iii) it contains a provision that restates existing California law on restrictive covenants and California’s prohibition on restrictions barring a provider from competing with a practice in the event of termination or resignation. Whether this bill advances and is ultimately signed remains unclear. EBG is actively monitoring this legislation.
From our Thought Leaders in Health Law video series: In today's complex and rapidly evolving health care landscape, navigating the path of expanding or selling a business requires a nuanced understanding of the intricate state and federal regulatory frameworks.
With states increasingly imposing legislative oversight to safeguard competition, care access, and quality, it's crucial for health care providers, private equity firms, and management organizations to have a strategic partner adept at handling these challenges.
States are imposing prior approval or prior review legislation to allow for more visibility regarding proposed transactions. Much of the legislation seeks to increase oversight of health care entity relationships with management companies and private equity firms.
What does this mean for you?
Due diligence is a standard phase of any corporate transaction, whether structured as an asset or stock sale or joint venture, and sellers are often surprised, and even overwhelmed, by the comprehensiveness of the diligence investigation. Preparing prior to soliciting bids or looking for a buyer can ease the burden of diligence and allow the seller to focus on other areas of the transaction, such as negotiating important terms and documents.
New York recently enacted new legislation that will amend Article 45-A of the New York Public Health Law, entitled “Disclosure of Material Transactions”. Although the legislation, as enacted, contains no description of legislative intent, the budget bill language originally proposed referenced concerns with the “proliferation of large physician practices being managed by entities that are investor-backed” (e.g., private equity platforms) and which are otherwise unregulated by the state outside of the licensure of the individual practitioners.
Effective August 1, 2023, the new legislation requires thirty (30) days advance notice to the New York State Department of Health (“Department”) of any “material transactions” involving “health care entities” that provide administrative or management services for physician practices, provider-sponsored organizations, health insurance plans, “or any other kind of health care facility, organization, or plan providing health care services. . . .”
In this episode of the Diagnosing Health Care Podcast: The Federal Reserve’s steady increase of interest rates and the slowed economic growth have increased fiscal pressure on health care providers, leaving many to look for ways to bridge budget shortfalls through injections of capital, asset sales, or other strategic transactions.
What options are there for providers moving forward?
The pace of health care transactions is robust, purchase price multiples are increasing, and many health care businesses are taking advantage of a sellers’ market. Recently, our clients have increasingly turned to representation and warranty (“R&W”) insurance, finding a market more amenable to the nuances of health care deals than in the past. In the right deal, R&W insurance can limit risk to both seller and buyer and increase value to a seller by allowing for “walk-away” or “naked” deals. R&W insurance may also be used as a tool by a buyer to increase the ...
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- Utah Law Aims to Regulate AI Mental Health Chatbots
- National Science Foundation (NSF) Imposes 15% Indirect Cost Rate Cap: What to Know
- New DOJ White Collar Priorities Focus on Health Care Fraud
- Federal Regulators Announce Non-Enforcement of the 2024 Rule for Mental Health Parity
- Will Colorado’s Historic AI Law Go Live in 2026? Its Fate Hangs in the Balance in 2025