Court Order Permanently Bars the ABO From Claiming its Certification
Demonstrates Competence Beyond that Required for Licensure, and Reinstates Lawsuit to Allow AOS to Seek Additional Relief
AGOURA HILLS, CA, September 5, 2011 – The Court in the American Optometric Society, Inc. (AOS) vs. American Board of Optometry, Inc. (ABO) lawsuit now pending in the United States District Court for the Central District of California has issued two important rulings in response to the AOS’ Motion for Reconsideration.
In the first ruling the Court issued a permanent injunction against the ABO making certain statements again in the future. Specifically, the Court issued the following ruling:
Defendant is hereby PERMANENTLY ENJOINED from publishing the following statements in any form of media, including its website:
1. “Board Certified Optometrists will demonstrate their competence beyond entry level for optometric licensure.”
2. “Board Certification is a voluntary process that establishes standards that demonstrate that the doctor of optometry has exceeded the requirement(s) for licensure.”
3. “Only Board Certified Optometrists have demonstrated their competence beyond entry level for optometric licensure.”
4. Quoting a practitioner as supposedly saying, “I want my patients and the public to see that I have achieved the highest level of certification available in eye care.”
5. “Board Certified Optometrists will be able to demonstrate their competence beyond entry level for optometric licensure.”
6. “Board Certification is a voluntary process that establishes standards that demonstrate that the doctor of optometry has exceeded the requirements for licensure.”
In the second ruling the Court granted the AOS’ Motion for Reconsideration of its prior ruling granting Summary Judgment for the ABO. This ruling reinstates the lawsuit on the remaining issues.
According to AOS attorney, Craig S Steinberg, O.D., J.D., “These rulings are clear and important victories for the AOS and for optometrists. The practical effect of the order permanently enjoining the ABO is that the AOS received the judgment it asked for: the ABO is not allowed to claim its certification program reflects or demonstrates competence beyond that required for licensure. That ends the case with respect to those statements. The second ruling means that, despite vigorous opposition by the ABO, the AOS may move forward to try and show that the ABO’s use of the phrases “board certified” and “board certification” are also misleading and confusing to the public. If the AOS succeeds it may result in the Court issuing an injunction against the ABO using those phrases in describing its program.”
“The AOS is extremely gratified that the Court has both issued a permanent injunction and that it has reconsidered and reversed its previous ruling. We felt it was important that the AOS be able to try and prove that, unlike the generally accepted meaning of board certification throughout the rest of health care, ABO certification is misleading and confusing to the public because it does not distinguish one optometrist as having more training or expertise than any other optometrist is already expected and required to have. We look forward to a decision based on the merits,” says AOS President Pamela Miller, O.D., F.A.A.O., J.D.
To read the actual court orders and AOS press release please open the attachements below.
| File | Description | File size | Last modified |
|---|---|---|---|
 Order on Motion for Reconsideration.pdf | 8 Kb | 09/12/11 11:05 | |
| Order on Permanent Injunction.pdf | 10 Kb | 09/12/11 11:06 | |
| Press Release-Reconsideration Order.pdf | 36 Kb | 09/07/11 09:03 |
Show/hide comments
Show/hide comment form