The petitioner, through his current counsel, filed another letter dated April 19, 2019, in which counsel indicated that he was ”supplementing the correction plan previously proposed by the supplier.” CMS Ex 2. Counsel for the petitioner stated that the provider does not have the required W&I Code license, section 14043.26(d)(4)(B), indicates that an application package is denied when an applicant does not have a license necessary to provide the health services or directly or indirectly provide goods or merchandise to a Medi Cal recipient in the corresponding service category or subgroup of that category. it is. In particular, you have not disclosed your property or your participation in the control of the following health care providers: National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence of East San Gabriel & Pomona Valleys, Inc., Your Personal Healthcare and Porter Ranch Medical Center. Nor did they reveal that [another person], CEO, owns and controls the following healthcare providers. . . . Please note that some third parties have requested and obtained provider privileges on a number of locations without my customer`s knowledge or consent.

On February 21, 2017, DHCS informed the petitioner that it was announcing its Medi-Cal supplier agreement. CMS Ex 5 to 2. The letter informed the petitioner that the DHCS had been notified to the petitioner on 17 November 2016, he had given 60 days to remedy the discrepancies in his application and provide documents indicating that he had remedied those discrepancies and, after submitting his request, he found that he had still not disclosed the necessary information. CMS Ex 5 to 2. Upon termination of its provider agreement, DHCS stated, among other things, that the petitioner ”did not disclose [its] interest in ownership or control for a number of health care providers.” CMS Ex 5 to 2. Non-disclosure of W&I Code, Section 14043.2(a), indicates that non-disclosure of necessary information or disclosure of false information results in the rejection of the application for registration or results in a temporary suspension of the Medi Cal program, which involves the temporary deactivation of all vendor numbers used by the provider to obtain a refund from the Medi Cal program. The petitioner`s only argument is that DCHS erred in entering its Medicaid provider agreement because of its being the victim of a ”forgery and forged deposit.” P. Br. 2 However, as already stated, the petitioner should not negotiate in this forum the benefits of his resignation from Medi Cal. See Douglas Bradley, M.D., ATM No. 2663 at 16.

And while I was inclined to consider such an argument, I find that the petitioner has provided no evidence that Noridian erred in removing its Medicare registration and settlement privileges pursuant to subsection 424.535(a)(12). See z.B. Pre-negotiation decision § 8 (instruction of the parties to file evidence of support); 12 (instruction of the right to a certified written direct certificate). The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has revoked through an administrative contractor, Noridian Healthcare Solutions (Noridian), the Medicare registration and billing privileges of Timur Pogodin, M.D. (Petitioner), because the State of California – Health and Human Services Agency, Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) had terminated the petitioner`s agreement to the California Medicaid program and CMS had upheld this decision in a new decision. The petitioner asked to be heard to challenge his revocation. I confirm the revocation of the petitioner`s Medicare registration and billing privileges. . . .