A resolution to the lawsuit challenging the nursing home federal minimum staffing mandate could be reached as early as January, if the court finalizes a proposed schedule put forth by the American Health Care Association (AHCA), LeadingAge and other industry leaders.

If this turns out to be the case, the lawsuit would be resolved more than a year prior to when non-rural nursing homes would need to adhere to the hourly minimums. Urban operators have a deadline of May 2026, while rural facilities need to meet the hourly minimum by May 2027. And so, this scenario would avoid costly litigation, legal experts said.

The minimum staffing rule, which was finalized on April 22 as part of the Biden administration’s nursing home reform initiative, mandates a minimum of 3.48 hours per resident per day (HPRD) requirement, along with the 24/7 registered nurse (RN) coverage.

AHCA and other nursing home leaders filed the lawsuit about a month after federal agencies finalized the staffing mandate, alleging that the federal government exceeded statutory authority and “arbitrarily and capriciously” issued a final minimum staffing rule.

Dispositive relief

AHCA and several Texas-based operators formally filed a joint motion for briefing schedule on Aug. 9, a day after mandate-related facility assessments began for nursing homes. The defendants, including the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure and HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, agreed the case might be resolved by cross-motions for dispositive relief. 

Dispositive relief is a request for a court to rule in a party’s favor, and can result in the dismissal or settlement of a case.

Craig Conley, shareholder at Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, said this move is common when both parties agree that a lawsuit is best resolved by dispositive relief. It’s the most efficient means for parties to obtain a result one way or the other by agreeing to proceed accordingly, he noted.

“The parties believe this will prevent protracted, lengthy and costly litigation by agreeing to proceed this route,” said Conley. “I suspect the court will grant the request of the parties as the court will also view this as an efficient means of resolution of this matter.”

It’s common to establish a briefing schedule within the context of the litigation process, said Jacob Harper, partner with Washington law firm Morgan Lewis & Bockius. “I don’t think it means much at this point,” he added.

If granted, both parties will file motions, asking for dispositive relief in their favor.

Schedule yet to be granted

The proposed schedule, according to court documents, starts with a Sept. 13 deadline for CMS to file an administrative record, followed by Sept. 27 as the date for AHCA and other operators parties to challenge the adequacy of the administrative record.

The administrative record would have documents the agency used in its decision to develop the staffing mandate.

On Oct. 18, plaintiffs would file a motion for summary judgment, and on Nov. 15, defendants would file a combined cross-motion for summary judgment and response to plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.

Both parties would be able to reply to motions filed on Oct. 18 and Nov. 15, with HHS getting the final word in on Jan. 17. A case can be decided based on submitted briefs and oral arguments with a summary judgment – no need to advance the trial.

AHCA and other plaintiffs would file a combined response to the cross-motion for summary judgment and reply in support of that judgment by Dec. 13. Finally, by Jan. 17, CMS would file a reply in support of the cross-motion for summary judgment.