Vein Clinics of America: FTC Case, Billing, and Successor Suits

Vein Clinics of America lawsuits and regulatory actions span a 1994 Federal Trade Commission deceptive-advertising order, a short-lived stockholder suit, and a stream of patient billing complaints. The chain, founded in 1981, was acquired by USA Vein Clinics in October 2022 and no longer operates as a separate brand.¹ Some cases people associate with VCA actually involve its successor or unrelated vein companies with similar names.

The 1994 FTC Deceptive Advertising Case

The defining legal action against VCA itself came from the Federal Trade Commission. In February 1994, the FTC announced a proposed consent agreement with Vein Clinics of America and its chairman and medical director, D. Brian McDonagh, M.D., over the marketing of what the company called its “MicroCure Process.” The FTC said the procedure was standard compression sclerotherapy already used by other physicians, not a novel treatment.²

The FTC complaint identified several categories of false claims. VCA had told consumers that varicose veins recur at 65 to 85 percent within five years after surgery, while advertising its own recurrence rate as under three percent. It described the procedure as “newly discovered” and “previously unavailable,” and told patients surgery was the only alternative before VCA existed. On safety, VCA said the treatment carried no risk of burning, marking, or scarring, and characterized health risks as limited to a one-in-a-thousand chance of mild allergic reaction. The FTC noted the treatment could in fact cause permanent pigmentation, ulcers, scarring, and severe allergic reactions including anaphylactic shock.²

The consent order barred VCA from making those specific claims going forward. It also required the company to have “competent and reliable scientific evidence” before making any future claims about success rates or health risks, and to keep substantiation records for five years. The order was placed on the public record for a 60-day comment period. Neither VCA nor McDonagh admitted wrongdoing.

Corporate Changes and Later Ownership

VCA operated independently from 1981 until August 2007, when IntegraMed America, Inc. acquired it and ran it as a Vein Clinics Division, providing business services and taking a controlling financial interest.³ In June 2010, Charles Martin filed a stockholder suit against VCA, IntegraMed, and others in the Northern District of Illinois. The case was terminated by July 2011.⁴

Frazier Healthcare Partners, a private equity firm, acquired VCA in a leveraged buyout in December 2017.⁵ Then in October 2022, USA Vein Clinics, founded by Dr. Yan Katsnelson, acquired VCA and folded it fully into its network. The combined company runs more than 160 locations across 30 states and is headquartered in Northbrook, Illinois.¹ Anyone dealing with a current VCA location is dealing with USA Vein Clinics.⁶

Patient Billing Complaints

Patient-side complaints against VCA have clustered around billing. The Better Business Bureau profile for Vein Clinics of America shows 14 complaints filed within a recent three-year window, all listed as unanswered. The pattern is consistent: patients say they were told a procedure would be covered, then received unexpected bills. One complainant reported being quoted full insurance coverage with no copay and then billed over $3,000. Another said a “free consultation” generated a $100 insurance claim and a $67.57 charge that eventually went to collections. Others describe unauthorized debit-card charges months after appointments, and package pricing that changed after USA Vein Clinics took over.⁷

Cases Against Successor USA Vein Clinics

Because VCA is now part of USA Vein Clinics, litigation against the successor is often what a search for VCA lawsuits actually turns up.

The Zverev Whistleblower Case

In October 2012, former employee Constantine Zverev filed a qui tam action in the Northern District of Illinois against USA Vein Clinics and Dr. Yan Katsnelson. Zverev alleged three schemes: that Katsnelson billed for volumes of endovascular laser therapy procedures physically impossible to perform in a day given his travel among Chicago, New York, and Boston clinics; that staff performed medically unnecessary procedures; and that clinics reused single-use laser fibers while billing insurers for new ones.⁸

In March 2017, the court let the billing-volume claim proceed to discovery but dismissed the other two claims without prejudice for insufficient specificity. The court also allowed Zverev’s retaliation claim to move forward, finding he had plausibly alleged he was fired in October 2011 after Katsnelson learned he was investigating billing practices.⁸ Court records show the case was terminated in August 2019. The terms of resolution are not publicly available.⁹

The Hennessy Case

A separate False Claims Act case was filed against USA Vein Clinics entities and Katsnelson in the Southern District of Texas in June 2025 by a plaintiff named Mark Hennessy. It remains in its early stages.¹⁰

Not the Same Company: Center for Vein Restoration

A $4 million False Claims Act settlement announced in March 2026 sometimes comes up in searches for VCA. That case involved a different company, the Center for Vein Restoration, along with CVR Management, LLC, the Center for Vascular Medicine, LLC, and Dr. Sanjiv Lakhanpal. It resolved allegations of billing Medicare, Medicaid, and TRICARE for medically unnecessary procedures, and was not brought against Vein Clinics of America.¹¹ A separate CVR class action over a 2024 data breach, which received final approval in November 2025 for $3.55 million, is likewise unrelated to VCA.¹²

1
USA Vein Clinics. Vein Clinics of America Is Now USA Vein Clinics
2
GovInfo. Proposed Consent Agreement With Vein Clinics of America, Inc.
3
SEC. IntegraMed America Registration Statement
4
PACER Monitor. Martin v. Vein Clinics of American, Inc. et al
5
Mergr. Frazier Healthcare Partners Acquires Vein Clinics of America
6
USA Vein Clinics. How USA Vein Clinics Growth Has Strengthened Access, Innovation, and Patient Care
7
Better Business Bureau. Vein Clinics of America Complaints
8
GovInfo. Zverev v. USA Vein Clinics of Chicago, LLC, et al.
9
CourtListener. Constantine Zverev v. USA Vein Clinics of Chicago, LLC
10
PACER Monitor. Hennessy v. USA Vein Clinics of Texas PLLC et al
11
U.S. Department of Justice. Health Care Management Corporation Agrees to Pay $4 Million to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations
12
CVR Data Settlement. CVR Data Settlement