Hospitals & Health Systems

The jury in the Tuomey case (U.S. ex rel. Drakeford v. Tuomey Healthcare Systems, Inc.) returned a verdict in favor of the government yesterday, May 8, 2013.  As is well known, this is the re-trial of a case centered on a series of employment agreements that Tuomey Healthcare entered to allegedly capture referrals

Mark D. Welker and  Scott A. Behrens, Husch Blackwell attorneys in our Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation group, recently addressed key questions employers should ask themselves about Healthcare Reform. Existing guidance in this area is complicated, confusing, and incomplete in many respects.  To access the key questions and examples of basic compliance hurdles and planning strategies, click

Once a proposed mark has been chosen, it is always a good idea to have your trademark attorney conduct a trademark search.  Even you are not aware of any other hospitals or medical centers using the mark that does not mean that there are none.  The search will look for marks that are “confusingly similar” to the mark being searched or are likely to cause confusion in the consuming public.  We will discuss the concept of confusing similarity and likelihood of confusion in the context of trademark infringement in a later post.

During the searching process there will again be a difference between descriptive or suggestive marks and fanciful or arbitrary marks.  The more descriptive the mark the more likely it is already in use in some manner by at least one other company.  Many times a descriptive or highly suggestive word or phrase may be in use by several different entities around the country for the same or similar goods or services.  Each use may be slightly different, thereby allowing each of them to co-exist. In this case each descriptive mark will have at best a narrow scope of protectability, perhaps limited to the exact mark for your exact services.  In some cases, if the mark is being used by several entities, it may be that the mark is also available for your use, but you will not be able to protect that mark from later use by yet another entity. Also, you may be advised that there is risk associated with use of the mark simply due to the number of prior users, any of whom  may choose to object to your new use of the mark.

With suggestive marks, the protection is for the mark, or any confusingly similar marks, but not for the “theme” of the mark. For example, a search for the mark “Service with a Heart” for cardiac care services may find several slightly different versions of this mark in use for similar services – You are the Heart of Our Business; Our Nurses Are All Heart; We Will Handle Your Heart with TLC etc. These marks all use the theme of having the word Heart in the mark; but they are not likely to be found to be confusingly similar to each other, even for the same services.

Husch Blackwell attorney Molly Kurt recently addressed this question in a review of cases in which OFCCP has attempted to assert jurisdiction over hospitals as covered federal subcontractors.  Most recently, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued UPMC Braddock et al. v. Harris, in which the district court affirmed the decision

Selecting a strong trademark is the key to being able to protect the trademark.  As we discussed last week, the first and central step in branding is selecting your facility’s trademarks, which promote a provider’s reputation, helping it stand out among its competition.  When choosing a name for a product or service, the inherent strength of mark should be considered, as this will affect many things going forward from the cost of a search to your ability to stop others from using similar names.

There are five categories of marks, each of which comes with its own level of legal protection. From least to most protected, they are:

  1. GENERIC: Names like “emergency room” or “doctors” – these cannot be trademarked.
  2. DESCRIPTIVE: Descriptive marks immediately provide information about the service or product.  These types of marks can be protected but only if they have acquired distinctiveness through use in commerce. Descriptive marks include laudatory marks (“Best Dental”); geographic marks (“North Shore Hospital”); and surnames (“Williams Orthopedics”).
  3.  SUGGESTIVE: These marks indirectly provide information about the goods and services requiring the consumer to make a mental step or connection to determine what the services are (“Service with a Heart” for a cardiac center; “Papoose” or “Joey” for pediatric services).  Suggestive marks are immediately protectable; however the scope of that protection is not as broad as for arbitrary or fanciful marks.
  4.  ARBITRARY: These marks, like “Apple” or “Amazon,” are real words but there is no connection between the words’ meaning and the services or products it is used for. These marks enjoy broad, strong protection.
  5.  FANCIFUL: These marks are made-up words, like “Xerox,” “Google,” or “Viagra,” created specifically to be used to identify the source or origin of certain goods or services. These are the most strongly protected marks.

Hospitals and other healthcare facilities have traditionally been named with geographic designations or with the name of a famous person or in other ways that would be considered “descriptive.”  These names, after long years of use are quite likely to have acquired “secondary meaning” so they are now protectable trademarks. Many such marks have become quite famous and will enjoy strong trademark protection despite their humble beginnings.  Therefore, the hospital will have the ability to police and control use by competitors of similar names.  However, it is unlikely that the hospital will be able to control all use of the descriptive elements of its name and trademark.

“Branding” is one of the most popular buzz words in the advertising and marketing arena.  But what does it mean to have a “brand” and what should you be willing to do to create and maintain your “brand”?  In today’s technology-driven economy, even the local hospital and primary care physician’s office have to compete for business. 

If you have been struggling to figure out the risk assessment requirements of the Final HIPAA Omnibus Rule, then you are in luck.  Join us for a webinar!  Husch Blackwell attorneys Pete Enko and Peter Sloan along with Director of Information Management Consulting Deb Juhnke will present the Who, What, When, How and Why

The head of ICU at the Stony Brook University Hospital on Long Island wants to change how medical professionals respond to cardiac arrest.

The Guardian is reporting that the British-trained physician, Sam Parnia, M.D., specializes in resurrection.  His patients can be dead for several hours before he is able to resuscitate them and restore them

Nursing is a study in multi-tasking: multiple patients with multiple issues that require complex medication management.  In addition, nurses have to manage massive amounts of information from both human and computer sources.  This week, The Joint Commission called for hospitals to address “alarm fatigue.”  According to The Joint Commission Sentinel Event Alert, medical devices that issue too many audio and visual

With so many rating systems and awards, hospital administrators and patients alike are increasingly frustrated and confused about which hospitals are the “best.”  According to an article by Kaiser Health News (KHN) in conjunction with The Philadelphia Inquirer, one-third of all U.S. hospitals received at least one distinction from a major ratings group or company