On July 29, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced its first resolution of a self-disclosure by a health care company under its new Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (CEP). The CEP, announced in March 2026, provides that companies that voluntarily self-disclose wrongdoing, cooperate with any subsequent investigation, and remediate the misconduct will not be subject to DOJ prosecution, absent limited aggravating circumstances. However, individuals may still be prosecuted for their role in any wrongdoing.
This investigation involved Campus Eye Management Holdings LLC and its wholly owned subsidiary, Campus Eye Management LLC (Campus Eye), a management services organization that provided health care administrative services to optometry practices and ambulatory surgery centers. Between 2015 and 2023, Campus Eye’s CEO, E. Bruce DiDonato, allegedly orchestrated a scheme to pay illegal kickbacks to providers in exchange for ordering unnecessary diagnostic tests, resulting in the submission of approximately $3.4 million in fraudulent claims to Medicare, of which Medicare paid approximately $1 million.
The DOJ stated that its decision not to prosecute Campus Eye was based on the company’s voluntary and timely self-disclosure, the company’s full and proactive cooperation, the nature and seriousness of the offense, the company’s timely and appropriate remediation of the alleged misconduct, the absence of aggravating circumstances, and the company’s agreement to disgorge $1 million in ill-gotten gains and to compensate victims. The DOJ separately announced a seven-count criminal indictment against DiDonato for his role in the alleged scheme, underscoring that the CEP does not shield individuals from criminal prosecution.
These DOJ actions highlight the importance of companies conducting thorough due diligence at each stage of a health care transaction, including of compliance programs, billing functions, and compliance with fraud and abuse laws and regulations to proactively discover potential issues and evaluate whether self-disclosure is appropriate. Despite the opportunities presented to a company under the CEP, those same opportunities are not afforded to the individuals alleged to have committed the bad acts. These distinctions for both companies and individuals are especially important as the DOJ continues to signal an intensified focus on investigating and prosecuting fraud involving federal health care programs.
If you have any questions about this article, please contact Jeremy Alexander at jmalexander@vedder.com, Arianna Goodman at agoodman@vedder.com, Katherine Devlin at kdevlin@vedder.com, Drew Savage at dsavage@vedder.com or any other Vedder attorney with whom you have worked.
