Q: For EMTALA complaint with CMIA claim under supplemental jurisdiction - motion to strike CMIA claim issue.

A: Regarding your first question about whether a court can include a hospice as a defendant in an EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act) claim, the answer depends on the specific facts of the case and the legal interpretation of EMTALA's scope. Generally, EMTALA applies to hospitals with emergency departments. If the hospice is operationally distinct from such a hospital, it's less likely to be directly subject to EMTALA. However, if there's a significant legal or operational overlap with a hospital subject to EMTALA, the court might find reasons to include the hospice. If the court decides to include the hospice, as the plaintiff, you have the right to challenge this decision, typically through a motion for reconsideration or appeal, depending on the stage of the proceedings.

In your second question about the potential inclusion of a CMIA (Confidentiality of Medical Information Act) claim in a subsequent FCA (False Claims Act) legal action, after being stricken from an EMTALA complaint: Generally, there are no specific statutes that inherently preclude the inclusion of a CMIA claim in an FCA case. The key consideration is the relevance and materiality of the CMIA claim to the FCA allegations. If the CMIA violation is factually and legally pertinent to the issues in the FCA case, such as being part of the fraudulent conduct alleged, it may be viable to include it. However, remember to consider the doctrines of claim preclusion and issue preclusion, which might affect the ability to litigate a claim that has been previously adjudicated or could have been raised in an earlier case.