Photo of Jonian Rafti

Jonian Rafti is an associate in the Corporate Department and a member of the Health Care Group. He regularly represents private equity investors, health systems, management companies, physician groups, and lenders in complex transactional and health care regulatory matters.

Since the start of his career, Jonian's practice has exclusively focused on representing a variety of clients in the health care sector. He leverages this industry experience to provide practical and market-driven insight to clients undertaking mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures, financings and other business transactions. In addition to his transactional practice, Jonian provides counsel on a range of regulatory requirements governing the practice of medicine and the health care industry, including the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute, Civil Monetary Penalties Law, Health Care Fraud Statute, Physician Self-Referral Law (Stark Law) and their state counterparts. He also advises clients on corporate practice of medicine restrictions, HIPAA and health data privacy, and health care technology matters.

Jonian is a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP/US) and a Certified Artificial Intelligence Governance Professional (AIGP). As a law student, he worked at the Charities Bureau of the NY Attorney General’s Office on governance and regulatory disputes affecting state not-for-profit corporations.

He has previously served as member of the Board of Directors and Vice-Chair of The Andrew Goodman Foundation, and member of the Bard College Center for Civic Engagement's Young Alumni Advisory Council.

This article was initially published as a Bulletin for the AHLA’s Physician Organizations Practice Group.

California Assembly Bill 3129[1] (“AB3129”), which targeted for regulatory review a variety of health care transactions involving “private equity groups” and “hedge funds,” was vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom on September 28, 2024.[2]

On August 29, 2024, the Office for Civil Rights of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS-OCR”) withdrew its appeal of an order by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas’ (“District Court”) declaring unlawful and vacating a portion of an HHS-OCR Bulletin

On August 31, 2024, the California State Assembly and State Senate passed Assembly Bill 3129 (“AB 3129”). If signed by Governor Newsom, AB 3129 would establish a comprehensive transaction review law that (i) targets private equity firms and hedge funds, and (ii) grants the Attorney General explicit consent rights over

Update as of 3/13/24:

House Bill 4130 died on March 4, 2024, after it failed to reach the Senate Floor. Representative Ben Bowman, the Bill’s chief sponsor, pledged to reintroduce the Bill as soon as the opportunity arises. The Bill garnered national attention as the latest state-led effort to regulate

In 2021, Congress enacted the Corporate Transparency Act (the “CTA”) to “better enable critical national security, intelligence, and law enforcement efforts to counter money laundering, the financing of terrorism, and other illicit activity.”[1] The CTA, which became effective January 1, 2024,[2] is described, in detail, in a series of Proskauer alerts compiled by Proskauer’s CTA Task Force. The CTA will create a national registry of the “beneficial owners” and “company applicants”[3] of millions[4] of entities across the country. A reporting company must disclose certain information about its beneficial owners and (for entities formed in 2024 and later) company applicants, including: (i) legal name; (ii) date of birth; (iii) residential address (or business address for certain company applicants); (iv) unique identifying number from a non-expired government-issued identification document; and (v) an image of such identification document.[5] In addition, states are following the Federal government’s lead and have adopted similar regulatory regimes; last month, for example, New York enacted the LLC Transparency Act, which comes into effect in December 2024.

Following New York State Governor Kathy Hochul’s proposal in February of this year (see our previous alert), the New York legislature passed and Governor Hochul signed a law on May 3, 2023, which significantly increases the state’s focus and visibility into physician practice management change‑of‑control transactions.[1] New York’s statute reflects a growing trend of states taking note of transactions that previously were not regulated by state administrative agencies. As we await the promulgation of regulations from the New York State Department of Health (“DOH”), we examine here how New York’s law compares to similar laws in other states, and describe precautions that operators in the physician management space — as well as those who do businesses with such operators — should take to safeguard themselves against major disruptions to operations.

On June 27, 2023, the Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) released its final rule (“Final Rule”) implementing penalties for information blocking.

The Final Rule codifies the prohibition on “information blocking” introduced by the 21st Century Cures Act (“Act”), which was enacted on December 13, 2016. In the Act, “information blocking” was defined as any activity that, in part, is “likely to interfere with, prevent, or materially discourage access, exchange, or use” of electronic health information (“EHI”).[1] The Final Rule provides an enforcement process for alleged information blocking violations by health information networks, health information exchanges, and developers of health IT certified by the HHS Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (“ONC”). Enforcement of the information blocking penalties will begin on September 1, sixty days after publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.

On February 1, 2023, New York Governor Kathy Hochul announced the 2024 Executive Budget. As alluded to in the Governor’s State of the State address, and as described in an earlier Proskauer Health Care Law Brief article, the Governor is proposing to adopt a wide-ranging approval requirement for health care transactions that appears to target investor-backed physician practices.

The legislative proposals related to health care, as contained in the Governor’s budget, were introduced as Senate Bill 4007 and Assembly Bill A3007. The bills propose to amend the Public Health Law (“PHL”) to introduce a new Article 45-A, named “Review and Oversight of Material Transactions.” See 2023 New York Senate-Assembly Bill S4007, A3007, Part M § 5.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) recently published the proposed 2023 Physician Fee Schedule (“PFS”), which contains several important changes affecting Accountable Care Organizations (“ACOs”) that participate in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (“MSSP”), including a new Advanced Incentive Program. See Proposed 2023 PFS, 82 Fed. Reg. 45,860 (July 29, 2022).

ACOs enable health care providers to provide coordinated patient care to Medicare beneficiaries, and to share in the savings resulting from improved care. According to CMS, as of January 1, 2022, over 11 million Medicare beneficiaries receive care from 483 ACOs across the country. Id. at 46,093.

The proposed changes are intended to advance “growth, alignment, and equity,” and to “increase the percentage of people with Medicare in accountable care arrangements.” Id. at 46,093-94. Of note, and as described in a publication preceding the PFS, CMS proposed the changes to increase (i)  the number of beneficiaries assigned to MSSP ACOs; (ii) the number of higher spending populations in the program, since the change to regionally-adjusted benchmarks; and (iii) the representation of Black (or African American), Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaska Native beneficiaries assigned to MSSP ACOs, as compared to Non-Hispanic Whites.

On July 20, 2022, the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services (“OIG”) issued a special fraud alert (“Alert”) advising “practitioners to exercise caution when entering into arrangements with purported telemedicine companies.” The Alert is only one of four such “special fraud alerts” that the OIG has issued in the past decade and it illustrates the importance of OIG’s statements.

OIG Flags Seven Characteristics of Telehealth Fraud

In the Alert, OIG cautions that certain companies that purport to provide telehealth, telemedicine, or telemarketing services (collectively, “Telemedicine Companies”) have carried out fraudulent schemes by: (i) aggressively recruiting physicians and non-physician practitioners (collectively, “Providers”) and (ii) paying kickbacks to such Providers in exchange for the ordering of unnecessary items or services, including durable medical equipment, genetic testing, and other prescription items. According to OIG, the fraudulent schemes have varied in design and operation and involved a variety of individuals, Providers, and health care vendors, including call centers, staffing companies, and marketers.