Elizabeth Holmes argues she shouldn’t be criminally charged with deceiving patients over false blood tests because the patients didn’t directly pay Theranos Inc., her company, for the results.

That’s one defense Holmes’s lawyers are making Monday in federal court in San Jose, California, as they try to get the high-profile fraud case thrown out.

“Some patients paid Walgreens (not Theranos), and some did not pay any money at all because their insurance companies paid for the tests,” Holmes said in a court filing.

Holmes is asking a judge to dismiss all 11 counts against her, including conspiracy and wire fraud, claiming that the government’s “bare-bones” indictment is “skimpy,” “paltry” and generally “flunks” a constitutional requirement that she gets fair notice of the charges against her. She’s taking particular aim at allegations that the health of thousands of patients was put at risk, and in some instances actually harmed, when they relied on Theranos blood tests.

The indictment attacks every aspect of Theranos’ business, Amy Saharia, a lawyer for Holmes, told U.S. District Judge Edward Davila. Prosecutors rely on “vague and general” claims made in a wide variety of settings, including one-on-one to investors, both orally and written, on Theranos’ website, press releases, advertisements and statements to the media, Saharia said.

“The doctor patient counts rely on marketing materials,” and an argument that they created an “implicit representation,” the lawyer said. Under criminal law, “there’s no such thing as an implicit representation,” she said. “We don’t know what this means.”

Theranos paid refunds to tens of thousands of patients for its tests in a settlement with the attorney general of Arizona, where the company’s services were sold in Walgreens stores, according to prosecutors. That was after Theranos had previously voided years of results, the U.S. said.