On June 26, 2025, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced that a Remote Patient Monitoring (“RPM”) provider (“Company”) and its physician owner, paid $1.29 million to settle allegations of submitting false claims to Medicare under the False Claims Act (“FCA”). This settlement highlights the increased growth in RPM services, while noting the government’s scrutiny of such services.

RPM involves using electronic devices to remotely monitor a patient’s health beyond the capabilities of a traditional clinical setting. These devices transmit patient health information to providers without requiring an in-office presence. RPM is most commonly used with blood pressure, weight and glucose level monitors, as they are widely used devices for chronic disease management, best supported by consistent data points to drive care planning. While RPM is a reimbursable service for traditional Medicare fee-for-service enrollees, the government requires the following components:

  1. The enrollee must have a chronic or acute condition.
  2. RPM must be conducted with an internet-connected device approved by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”).
  3. RPM must collect and transmit a minimum amount of data within 30 days.

DOJ Allegations

Under the “reverse false claims” provision of the FCA, the Company failed to refund the federal government for 2.5 years of claims for improperly provided RPM services. Specifically, the DOJ alleged the following:

  • Kickbacks: The Company allegedly paid physician practice groups illegal kickbacks in exchange for referrals. The Company and its billing affiliate provided physician practices with complimentary access to EHR systems. In turn, the Company reviewed patient records to determine RPM eligibility and then cold-called patients to generate referrals.
  • Improper Billing: The Company billed Medicare for RPM services that the DOJ found to be non-reimbursable, including:
    • The Company did not provide patients with FDA-approved devices for the requisite two-year period. Instead, patients manually uploaded data via a mobile app, which, according to the FDA, is not a medical device. In some instances, the Company collected patient data by calling patients when the patients did not use the app.
    • Even in instances when devices were provided, the Company did not properly bill for its services because it did not collect enough days’ worth of data (16 days/month). Instead, the Company checked their app for engagement one day per month.
    • Finally, it was further alleged that the Company intercepted patient messages intended for their physician and relied on untrained staff to determine if escalation was necessary.

Practical Takeaways

RPM is well-positioned to play a transformational role in chronic disease management, especially as AI integration continues, wearable device adoption accelerates and federal health priorities shift towards chronic disease prevention. However, as the use and reimbursement of RPM continue to grow, so too will federal scrutiny. RPM providers should proactively assess their programs to mitigate reimbursement risks and ensure regulatory alignment to prevent false claims risk.

Providers relying on RPM must ensure their usage meets CMS reimbursement requirements, including using FDA-approved devices with proper data collection protocols.

Special thanks to Summer Associate Nick Baker for his assistance in the preparation of this article.

Hall Render blog posts and articles are intended for informational purposes only. For ethical reasons, Hall Render attorneys cannot—outside of an attorney-client relationship—answer specific questions that would be legal advice.

The post Remote Patient Monitoring Company Settles $1.29 Million FCA Settlement appeared first on Law Firm | Health Care Law Firm in the USA | Hall Render.