Category Archives: Conspiracy

Alleged Head of Wildlife Smuggling Ring Extradited from Australia

Posted on by

Monday, July 24, 2017

Guan Zong Chen (“Graham Chen”), a Chinese national was arraigned today in federal court in Boston, Massachusetts on charges that he led a conspiracy to illegally export (smuggle) $700,000 worth of wildlife items made from rhinoceros horn, elephant ivory and coral from the United States to Hong Kong. Chen was arrested last year when he traveled from China to Australia and today’s hearing was his first court appearance on an indictment returned by a Boston grand jury in 2015 and unsealed in anticipation of the hearing.

According to the eight-count indictment, Chen purchased the wildlife artifacts at U.S. auction houses located in California, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York and Texas. He conspired with another Chinese national, a recent college graduate in China to travel to the United States to pick up the purchased items and either hand carry or arrange for them to be mailed to another co-conspirator that owned a shipping business in Concord, Massachusetts. The shipper then repacked the wildlife items and exported (smuggled) them to Hong Kong with documents that falsely stated their contents and value and without obtaining required declarations and permits. In April 2014, Chen visited the United States and visited the shipper in Concord, Massachusetts. During the visit with the shipper, CHEN instructed the shipper to illegally export (smuggle) a sculpture made from elephant ivory to Hong Kong on Chen’s behalf and falsely declared it to be made of wood and worth $50.

The unsealing of the indictment and court appearance were was announced today by Acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey H. Wood of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division and Acting U.S. Attorney William D. Weinreb of the District of Massachusetts. In announcing the case today, Acting Assistant Attorney General Wood and Acting U.S. Attorney Weinreb expressed their appreciation to the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Attorney-General’s Department for their help in apprehending Chen and extraditing him to the United States.

Trade in rhinoceros horn, elephant ivory and coral have been regulated since 1976 under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), a treaty signed by over 175 countries around the world to protect fish, wildlife, and plants that are or may become imperiled due to the demands of international markets. Animals listed under CITES cannot be exported from the United States without prior notification to, and approval from, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

was apprehended as part of Operation Crash, an ongoing effort by the Department of the Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service, in coordination with the Department of Justice to detect, deter, and prosecute those engaged in the illegal killing of and trafficking in protected species including rhinoceros and elephants.

An indictment contains allegations that crimes have been committed. A defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The investigation is continuing and is being handled by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s Office of Law Enforcement and the Justice Department’s Environmental Crimes Section, with assistance from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts and support on the extradition from DOJ’s Office of International Affairs and the U.S. Marshals Services in the District of Massachusetts. The government is represented by Senior Litigation Counsel Richard A. Udell and Trial Attorney Gary N. Donner of the Justice Department’s Environmental Crimes Section of the Environment and Natural Resources Division.

Former Employee Of Commercial Supply Company Admits Fraud, False Testimony Before Grand Jury

Posted on by

Monday, July 24, 2017

TRENTON, N.J. – A former salesman at Bayway Lumber, a Linden, New Jersey, company that sold commercial and industrial products to numerous public and private entities, today admitted his role in a scheme to defraud customers and lying to a federal grand jury, Acting U.S. Attorney William E. Fitzpatrick announced.

Adam Martignetti, 43, of South River, New Jersey, pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Peter G. Sheridan in Trenton federal court to Counts 1 and 6 of an indictment charging him with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and making false declarations before a grand jury.

According to documents filed in this case and statements made in court:

Martignetti admitted that from 2011 through 2013 he conspired with others to defraud certain Bayway Lumber customers by providing free items to customers’ employees and then recouping the cost of the items (plus additional revenue for Bayway Lumber) by overbilling and fraudulently billing the customers. Martignetti also admitted to supplying lower-quality, less expensive plywood to a customer, but charging for the more expensive, higher-quality plywood the customer had ordered.

Martignetti gave a variety of personal items to employees of some of Bayway Lumber’s customers, including Amtrak, the City of Elizabeth, and the Plainfield Board of Education.  These items included a laptop, several iPads, a camera and sound system, patio furniture, and other merchandise. Under the supervision of Robert Dattilo, president and partial owner of Bayway Lumber, Martignetti then overbilled and fraudulently billed those customers. Dattilo kept a running tally of how much Martignetti and others overbilled and fraudulently billed customers, which many at Bayway Lumber referred to as the “Bank,” to ensure that Bayway Lumber recovered the full cost of the free items. Dattilo previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and was sentenced in July 2016 to 48 months in prison and ordered to pay $708,386 in restitution.

Martignetti also conspired to provide one Bayway Lumber customer, Consolidated Edison Co. of New York Inc. (Con Edison), with lower-quality wood than it ordered and paid for. When Con Edison ordered graded plywood, a type of plywood graded by mills that had met a certain set of specifications, Martignetti, at Dattilo’s instruction, routinely sent plywood that was of a lower grade or not graded at all, including “reject” plywood, but charged Con Edison for the higher-quality plywood that it ordered.

Martignetti also pleaded guilty to falsely testifying before a federal grand jury while appearing as a witness under oath in March 2013 that he had never given Bayway Lumber items to City of Elizabeth employees for free, and that Elizabeth was never charged for items that were for Elizabeth employees’ personal use.

The conspiracy to commit wire fraud charge to which Martignetti pleaded guilty carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. The charge of knowingly making false statements before a grand jury guilty carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Each count also carries a maximum fine of $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss associated with the offense, whichever is greatest. Sentencing is scheduled for Sept. 28, 2017.

Acting U.S. Attorney Fitzpatrick credited special agents with the Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge Christina Scaringi; the Office of Inspector General, Amtrak, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge Michael Waters; and the FBI, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge Timothy Gallagher, with the investigation leading to today’s guilty plea.

The government is represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Cari Fais of the U.S. Attorney’s Office Special Prosecutions Division, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Barbara R. Llanes, Chief, General Crimes Unit, of the U.S. Attorney’s Criminal Division, in Newark.

Defense Counsel: Michael Armstrong Esq., Willingboro, New Jersey

Houston Physician Convicted of Conspiracy in $1.5 Million Medicare Fraud Scheme

Posted on by

Friday, July 21, 2017

A federal jury convicted a Houston physician today for his role in a scheme involving approximately $1.5 million in fraudulent Medicare claims for home health care services and various medical testing and services.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Blanco of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Acting U.S. Attorney Abe Martinez of the Southern District of Texas, Special Agent in Charge Perrye K. Turner of the FBI’s Houston Field Office, Special Agent in Charge C.J. Porter of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Office of Inspector General’s (HHS-OIG) Dallas Region and the Texas Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU) made the announcement.

After a four-day trial, Ronald F. Kahn, M.D., 62, of Harris County, Texas, was convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and one count of conspiracy to pay and receive illegal kickbacks. Sentencing has been scheduled for September 25, before U.S. District Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt, who presided over the trial.

According to evidence presented at trial, from approximately 2006 until 2013, Kahn and others engaged in a scheme to defraud Medicare out of approximately $1.5 million in fraudulent claims for home heath care services in connection with Allied Covenant Home Health, Inc., a Houston home healthcare agency (Allied).  Kahn fraudulently admitted patients for home health care with Allied when they did not qualify for such services, the evidence showed. To make it appear that these patients did qualify, Kahn falsified medical records and signed false documents purporting to show that patients admitted to Allied’s home health program satisfied Medicare’s requirements for admission, the evidence showed.

The evidence also showed that Kahn paid illegal kickbacks for patients from Harris Health Care Group, a Houston medical clinic (Harris). Kahn paid illegal kickbacks to the owner of Harris in order to bill Medicare for facet injections that were medically unnecessary, not provided or both, the evidence showed.

The case was investigated by the FBI, HHS-OIG and Texas MFCU, and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, under the supervision of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant Chief Ashlee McFarlane and Trial Attorney Scott Armstrong of the Fraud Section.

The Fraud Section leads the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, which is part of a joint initiative between the Department of Justice and HHS to focus their efforts to prevent and deter fraud and enforce current anti-fraud laws around the country.  The Medicare Fraud Strike Force operates in nine locations nationwide.  Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force has charged over 3,500 defendants who collectively have falsely billed the Medicare program for over $12.5 billion.

Telecom Executive Pleads Guilty to FCPA Charge in Connection With Haitian Bribery Scheme

Posted on by

Wednesday, July 19, 2017

The former general manager of a Miami-based telecommunications company pleaded guilty today for his role in a scheme to pay $3 million in bribes to various Haitian officials to secure a lucrative contract with Telecommunications D’Haiti (Haiti Teleco), the state-owned and state-controlled telecommunications company in Haiti.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Blanco of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Acting U.S. Attorney Benjamin G. Greenberg of the Southern District of Florida, Special Agent in Charge Kelly R. Jackson of Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation’s (IRS-CI) Miami Field Office made the announcement.

Amadeus Richers, 66, of Brazil, pleaded guilty in federal court in Miami to count one of a second superseding indictment charging him with conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).  According to admissions in the plea documents, beginning in 2001 and lasting until 2004, Richers and his co-conspirators paid roughly $3 million in bribes directly and indirectly to foreign officials employed by Haiti Teleco and to a foreign official in the executive branch of the Haitian government in order to secure a favorable contract and favorable treatment in connection with that contract from Haiti Teleco.  The co-conspirators funneled some of the money through third-party intermediaries and paid other money directly to officials or relatives of officials, Richers admitted.

Richers is the ninth defendant to have pled guilty or to have been convicted at trial in this case.  On April 27, 2009, Antonio Perez, a former controller at one of the Miami-based telecommunications companies, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to violate the FCPA and money laundering.  On May 15, 2009, Juan Diaz, the president of J.D. Locator Services, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to violate the FCPA and money laundering.  On Feb. 19, 2010, Jean Fourcand, the president and director of Fourcand Enterprises Inc., pleaded guilty to one count of money laundering for receiving and transmitting bribe monies in the scheme.  On March 12, 2010, Robert Antoine, a former director of international affairs for Haiti Teleco, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering.  On Aug. 4, 2011, Joel Esquenazi and Carlos Rodriguez, who were the former president and vice-president, respectively, of one of the telecommunications companies, were convicted by a federal jury of one count of conspiracy to violate the FCPA and wire fraud, seven counts of FCPA violations, one count of money laundering conspiracy and 12 counts of money laundering.  On Feb. 8, 2012, Patrick Joseph, a former executive director of Haiti Teleco, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering.  On March 12, 2012, Jean Rene Duperval, a former director of international relations for Haiti Teleco, was convicted by a federal jury of two counts of conspiracy to commit money laundering and 19 counts of money laundering.

Richers was indicted on July 12, 2011, but remained a fugitive until his arrest and ultimately his extradition from Panama on February 23. Richers will be sentenced on September 20.

The Department of Justice is grateful to the government of Haiti for continuing to provide substantial assistance in gathering evidence during this investigation.  In particular, Haiti’s financial intelligence unit, the Unité Centrale de Renseignements Financiers (UCREF), the Bureau des Affaires Financières et Economiques (BAFE), which is a specialized component of the Haitian National Police, and the Ministry of Justice and Public Security provided significant cooperation and coordination in this ongoing investigation.

The Department of Justice also thanks Panama for its significant assistance in this matter.

IRS-CI is conducting the investigation.  Senior Litigation Counsel Nicola Mrazek and Trial Attorney Vanessa Snyder of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section are prosecuting the case.  The Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs provided assistance.

The Fraud Section is responsible for investigating and prosecuting all FCPA matters.  Additional information about the Justice Department’s FCPA enforcement efforts can be found at www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/foreign-corrupt-practices-act.

Guardianship Firm and its Principals Charged with Federal Conspiracy, Fraud, Theft and Money Laundering Offenses

Posted on by

Wednesday, July 19, 2017

Twenty-Eight Count Indictment Alleges that Co-Founders of Ayudando Guardians, Inc., Embezzled Millions from Client Accounts to Support Lavish Lifestyles

U.S. Marshals Service Assumes Control of Ayudando Guardians, Inc.,

to Ensure Continuity of Services for Special Needs Clients

ALBUQUERQUE – Federal law enforcement officials today announced the filing of conspiracy, fraud, theft and money laundering charges against Ayudando Alpha, Inc., d/b/a “Ayudando Guardians, Inc.” (Ayudando), and its co-founders, Susan Harris, 70, and Sharon Moore, 62, both residents of Albuquerque, N.M. The charges, which are contained in a 28-count indictment, arise out of an alleged decade-long sophisticated scheme to embezzle funds from client trust accounts managed by Ayudando, a non-profit corporation that provides guardianship, conservatorship and financial management services to hundreds of individuals with special needs.

According to the indictment, Ayudando – which means “helping” in Spanish – receives government benefit payments from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and U.S. Social Security Administration (SSA) on behalf of many of its clients, and acts as a fiduciary or representative payee for these clients by paying their expenses and maintaining the balances for the benefit of the clients. The indictment alleges that Harris and Moore, the primary owners and operators of Ayudando, have embezzled millions of dollars from their special needs clients to support lavish lifestyles for themselves and their families.

The charges against Ayudando, Harris and Moore are the result of an ongoing multi-agency investigation by the FBI, IRS Criminal Investigation, U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), VA Office of Inspector General and SSA Office of Inspector General. This morning federal law enforcement agents arrested Harris and Moore. Harris and Moore made their initial appearances in federal court in Albuquerque this morning. They are scheduled to return to court at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow, July 20, 2017, to be arraigned on the indictment and for detention hearings.

Federal authorities also enforced a federal court order that authorized the USMS’s Complex Assets Unit to assume control of Ayudando’s business operations. The court order appoints the USMS as the Receiver and Monitor of Ayudando, including all its financial accounts. The order authorizes the USMS to operate the business to ensure that its assets are not improperly spent or removed, and that the interests of Ayudando clients are protected as the prosecution of the criminal case goes forward. The USMS’s operation of Ayudando will ensure continuity of services for Ayudando clients.

The charges against Ayudando, Harris and Moore were announced by Acting U.S. Attorney James D. Tierney, U.S. Marshal Conrad E. Candelaria, Special Agent in Charge Terry Wade of the Albuquerque Division of the FBI, Special Agent in Charge Ismael Nevarez Jr., of the Phoenix Field Office of IRS Criminal Investigation, Special Agent in Charge Carl D. Scott of the Criminal Investigations Division of the VA’s Office of Inspector General, and Special Agent in Charge Robert Feldt of the Dallas Field Division of the SSA’s Office of the Inspector General.

In making the announcement, Acting U.S. Attorney James D. Tierney said, “This case is all about the victims. The victims in this case relied upon Ayudando to manage their finances and meet their needs. If the allegations in the indictment are true, the principals of Ayudando cruelly violated the trust of their clients and looted their benefits. Federal law enforcement has now stepped in to ensure that the looting stops. The U.S. Attorney’s Office and its partners will conduct this prosecution in a manner that provides for the continued receipt of benefits by Ayudando’s clients, while holding the principals of the company accountable for their conduct.”

“This morning the U.S. Marshals Service assumed control of Ayudando’s business operations to ensure that the victims of the crimes charged in the indictment, which include our disabled veterans, and other Ayudando clients will continue to receive the services they deserve and are entitled to,” said U.S. Marshal Conrad E. Candelaria. “The U.S. Marshals Service also will continue to assist its law enforcement partners in the continuing investigation.”

“Many of our most vulnerable Americans, such as those with special needs, trust fiduciaries to handle their government benefits for them. Unfortunately, there are plenty of criminals willing to steal what could be a person’s only source of income, using the money to support a lavish lifestyle,” said Special Agent in Charge Terry Wade of the FBI’s Albuquerque Division. “The FBI, working with our law enforcement and government partners, is committed to bringing to justice those individuals whose greed destroys the lives and dreams of innocent people.”

“The indictment alleges that, instead of helping people with special needs, the defendants were greedy and helped themselves to their clients’ money,” said Special Agent in Charge Ismael Nevarez Jr., of the Phoenix Field Office of IRS Criminal Investigation. “IRS Criminal Investigation will always investigate individuals who misuse non-profit businesses and cause harm to those whose needs are supposed to be served by those businesses.”

“Professional fiduciaries who defraud vulnerable veterans are reprehensible,” said Special Agent in Charge Carl D. Scott of the Criminal Investigations Division of the VA Office of Inspector General. “The VA OIG will continue to work with other law enforcement agencies to expose those who harm veterans or exploit VA benefits systems and bring them to justice.”

“The SSA OIG is committed to investigating cases of suspected representative payee fraud, which can involve the theft of government funds and harm some of our most vulnerable citizens,” said Special Agent in Charge Robert Feldt of the Dallas Field Division of the SSA Office of the Inspector General. “We will continue to work with our law enforcement partners and the U.S. Attorney’s Office on this case.”

The 28-count indictment, which was filed under seal on July 11, 2017 and was unsealed and publicly posted earlier today, includes two conspiracy counts, ten counts of mail fraud, nine counts of aggravated identify theft and six counts of money laundering. According to the indictment, from Nov. 2006, when Harris and Moore founded Ayudando, and continuing until July 2017, Ayudando, Harris and Moore embezzled millions of dollars from Ayudando client accounts to cover their personal expenses and support lavish lifestyles for themselves and their families. The indictment alleges that Harris and Moore perpetuated the embezzlement scheme by:

  • Establishing Ayudando as a non-profit corporation in Nov. 2006, to position it as a guardian, conservator, fiduciary and representative payee for individuals needing assistance with their financial affairs;
  • Setting up client trust and company bank accounts which only they controlled;
  • Transferring funds from client accounts to Ayudando company accounts;
  • Using client funds to pay off more than $4 million in charges on a company credit card account used by Harris, Moore and their families for personal purposes;
  • Writing checks from Ayudando company accounts to themselves, cash and to cover personal expenses;
  • Replenishing depleted client accounts with funds taken from other clients;
  • Mailing fraudulent statements and certifications to the VA; and
  • Forging and submitting forged bank statements to the VA.

The indictment identifies some of the ways in which Harris and Moore used the money they allegedly stole from Ayudando clients. For example, the indictment alleges that between June 2011 and March 2014, Harris wrote 12 checks in the total amount of $457,883 on the Ayudando client reimbursement account for personal purpose, including a $50,950 check made out to Mercedes Benz of Albuquerque and a $26,444 check made out to Myers RV Center. It also alleges that between Jan. 2013 and Feb. 2017, Harris used an Ayudando company credit card to pay $140,790 to cover luxury vacations for herself and others, including cruises in the Caribbean isles and a “Final Four” basketball junket, while knowing that Moore would pay off the charges using client funds.

The mail fraud charges in the indictment describe some of the fraudulent documents allegedly mailed by Ayudando, Harris and Moore to the VA to perpetuate and conceal their embezzlement scheme. For example, between Jan. 2016 and Nov. 2016, Moore allegedly mailed fraudulent documents to the VA that falsely represented the balances in ten client accounts. According to the indictment, the documents falsely claimed that the ten client accounts had an aggregate balance of $1,906,908, when the actual value of the ten accounts was only $72,281. The ten client accounts identified in the indictment are examples of the fraud allegedly perpetrated by the defendants as part of their embezzlement scheme.

According to the indictment, Ayudando, Harris and Moore also engaged in aggravated identify theft by using their clients’ names, dates of birth, Social Security Numbers and VA file numbers to commit mail fraud offenses. Harris and Moore also allegedly committed money-laundering offenses by using $392,623 from the Ayudando client reimbursement account to pay off balances on a company credit card used by the defendants and their families for personal purposes. The indictment includes forfeiture provisions that seek forfeiture to the United States of any proceeds and property involved in, or derived from, the defendants’ unlawful conduct.

If the defendants are convicted on the crimes charged in the indictment, they face the following maximum statutory penalties:

  • Count 1, conspiracy – 30 years of imprisonment and a $250,000 fine;
  • Counts 2-11, mail fraud – 30 years of imprisonment and a $250,000 fine;
  • Counts 12-21, aggravated identity theft – a mandatory two-years of imprisonment that must be served consecutive to any other sentence imposed on other counts and a $250,000 fine;
  • Counts 22-27, money laundering – ten years of imprisonment and a $250,000 fine or twice the amount of the property involved in the crime; and
  • Count 28, conspiracy to commit money laundering – ten years of imprisonment and a $250,000 fine or twice the amount of the property involved in the crime.

The Albuquerque offices of the FBI and IRS Criminal Investigation conducted the investigation, which resulted in the charges in the indictment, and are leading the continuing investigation. The Complex Assets Unit and the Albuquerque office of the USMS, the Criminal Investigations Division of the VA Office of Inspector General, and the Dallas Field Division of the SSA Office of Inspector General are assisting in the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Jeremy Peña and Brandon L. Fyffe are prosecuting the case.

Ayudando clients or family members of Ayudando clients who need to speak with someone about their accounts or expenses should call Ayudando, which is now being operated by the U.S. Marshals Service, at 505-332-4357.

Starting tomorrow, information about the federal investigation into Ayudando, including the indictment and the federal court order, will be available at www.justice.gov/usao-nm/ayudando-guardians. Also starting tomorrow, Ayudando clients can direct their comments or concerns to the U.S. Attorney’s Office at [email protected](link sends e-mail) or 505-346-6902.

Charges in indictment are merely allegations and defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

 

Ayudando Indictment

Clinical Psychologist and Owner of Psychological Services Centers Sentenced to 264 Months for Roles in $25 Million Psychological Testing Scheme Carried out Through Eight Companies in Four States

Posted on by

Friday, July 14, 2017

Two owners of psychological services companies, one of whom was a clinical psychologist, were sentenced yesterday for their involvement in a $25.2 million Medicare fraud scheme carried out through eight companies at nursing homes in four states in the Southeastern U.S.

The announcement was made by Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Blanco of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Acting U.S. Attorney Duane A. Evans of the Eastern District of Louisiana, Special Agent in Charge Jeffrey S. Sallet of the FBI’s New Orleans Field Office and Special Agent in Charge C.J. Porter of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General’s (HHS-OIG) Dallas Regional Office.

Rodney Hesson, 47, of Slidell, Louisiana, and Gertrude Parker, 63 of Slidell, Louisiana, were sentenced on July 13, to 180 months’ imprisonment and 84 months’ imprisonment by U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Barbier of the Eastern District of Louisiana. Judge Barbier also ordered Hesson to pay $13,800,553.57 in restitution, and ordered Parker to pay $7,313,379.75 in restitution. The defendants were each convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and one count of conspiracy to make false statements related to health care matters on January 24.

According to evidence presented at trial, Hesson and Parker’s companies, Nursing Home Psychological Services (NHPS) and Psychological Care Services (PCS), respectively, contracted with nursing homes in Alabama, Florida, Lousiana and Mississippi to allow NHPS and PCS clinical psychologists to provide psychological services to nursing home residents. Hesson and Parker caused these companies to bill Medicare for psychological testing services that these nursing home residents did not need or in some instances did not receive, the trial evidence showed. During trial, evidence was entered showing that between 2009 and 2015, NHPS and PCS submitted over $25.2 million in claims to Medicare, the vast majority of which were fraudulent, while Medicare paid more than $13.5 million on the fraudulent claims. The jury verdict included a money judgment of $8,956,278, as well as forfeiture of Hesson’s home and at least $525,629 in seized currency.

The case was investigated by the FBI and HHS-OIG, and brought by the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, under the supervision of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The case is being prosecuted by Senior Litigiation Counsel John Michelich and Trial Attorneys Katherine Raut and Katherine Payerle of the Fraud Section.

The Fraud Section leads the Medicare Fraud Strike Force. Since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, now operating in nine cities across the country, has charged over 3,000 defendants who collectively have billed the Medicare program for over $11 billion. In addition, the HHS Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with the HHS-OIG, are taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.

To learn more about the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT), go to www.stopmedicarefraud.gov.

Three Former Traders for Major Banks Arraigned in Foreign Currency Exchange Antitrust Conspiracy

Posted on by

Monday, July 17, 2017

Three United Kingdom nationals and former traders of major banks voluntarily surrendered to the FBI and were arraigned on a charge arising from their alleged roles in a conspiracy to manipulate the price of U.S. dollars and euros exchanged in the foreign currency exchange (FX) spot market, the Justice Department announced today.

A one-count indictment, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on January 10, 2017, charges Richard Usher (former Head of G11 FX Trading-UK at an affiliate of The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, as well as former Managing Director at an affiliate of JPMorgan Chase & Co.), Rohan Ramchandani (former Managing Director and head of G10 FX spot trading at an affiliate of Citicorp) and Christopher Ashton (former Head of Spot FX at an affiliate of Barclays PLC) with conspiring to fix prices and rig bids for U.S. dollars and euros exchanged in the FX spot market.

The charge in the indictment carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a $1 million fine. The maximum fine may be increased to twice the gain derived from the crime or twice the loss suffered by victims if either amount is greater than $1 million.

According to the indictment, from at least December 2007 through at least January 2013, Usher, Ramchandani and Ashton (along with unnamed co-conspirators) conspired to fix prices and rig bids for the euro – U.S. dollar currency pair. Called “the Cartel” or “the Mafia,” this group of traders carried out their conspiracy by participating in telephone calls and near-daily conversations in a private electronic chat room. Their anticompetitive behavior included colluding around the time of certain benchmark rates known as fixes, such as by coordinating their bidding/offering and trading to manipulate the price of the currency pair by the time of the fix or otherwise profit as a result of the fix price. The conspirators also coordinated their trading activities outside of fix times, such as by refraining from entering bids/offers or trading at certain times as a means of stabilizing or controlling price.

The charge in the indictment is merely an allegation, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

This prosecution is being handled by the Antitrust Division’s New York Office and the FBI’s Washington Field Office. Anyone with information concerning price fixing or other anticompetitive conduct in the FX market should contact the Antitrust Division’s Citizen Complaint Center at (888) 647-3258, visit https://www.justice.gov/atr/report-violations or call the FBI tip line at (415) 553-7400.

Former DHS Employee Sent to Prison for Scheme to Steal USDA Funds Intended to Feed Hungry Children

Posted on by

Monday, July 17, 2017

LITTLE ROCK—Patrick C. Harris, Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas, announced Monday that United States District Court Judge James M. Moody, Jr., sentenced Gladys Waits, 37, of Little Rock, to prison for her role in a scheme to steal money intended for feeding children in low income areas.

Judge Moody sentenced Waits, who pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit wire fraud on March 30, 2016, to 108 months’ imprisonment, to be followed by three years of supervised release. She was also ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $9,669,269.66.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) feeding programs in Arkansas are administered through the Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS). Sponsors who want to participate in the feeding programs must submit an application to DHS for approval. After they are approved, they can provide meals as part of the feeding programs, and they are reimbursed for the eligible meals they serve.

Waits is the eighth defendant to be sentenced for her involvement in a scheme to fraudulently obtain USDA program funds intended to feed children in low income areas. Other defendants sentenced include: Kattie Jordan, 63 months’ imprisonment on March 15, 2016; Reuben Nims, 21 months’ imprisonment on November 2, 2016; Tonique Hatton, 108 months’ imprisonment on January 4, 2017; James Franklin, 24 months’ imprisonment on January 10, 2017; Maria Nelson, 30 months’ imprisonment on January 31, 2017; Michael Lee, 30 months’ imprisonment on May 1, 2017; and Christopher Nichols, 3 years’ probation on May 16, 2017.

Waymon Weeams, Dortha Harper, Francine Leon, Alexis Young, and Erica Warren have all pleaded guilty to conspiring to defraud USDA feeding programs and are awaiting sentencing. Jacqueline Mills and Anthony Waits were convicted on April 6, 2017, following a jury trial and are also awaiting sentencing.

Gladys Waits worked for DHS and her responsibilities included processing applications from sponsors who applied to participate in the feeding programs, determining their eligibility, and approving their proposed feeding sites. Waits was responsible for approving the feeding programs for Mills, Jordan, Nims, Franklin, Nichols, Weeams, and Harper at various times between August 2012 and August 2014. The sponsors submitted claims with inflated numbers of children fed. Waits also helped these sponsors avoid DHS’s detection of the fraud.

Gladys Waits received bribe payments from some sponsors, both directly through checks made payable to her and indirectly through checks made payable to relatives, including her husband, Anthony Waits. Anthony Waits recruited sponsors Nims, Franklin, Nichols, Weeams and Harper to participate and they paid a percentage of the proceeds they received from the programs back to Anthony Waits.

The investigation is ongoing and is being conducted by the USDA–Office of Inspector General, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service–Criminal Investigations, and United States Marshals Service. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Jana Harris, Allison W. Bragg, and Cameron McCree.

If you are aware of any fraudulent activity regarding feeding programs, please email that information to [email protected](link sends e-mail).

CCC’s: The Sherman Act is An Unconstitutional Criminal Statute (Part II)

Posted on by

July 19, 2017 by Robert Connolly 2 Comments

In Part 1 of this article (here), I argued that the Sherman Act was unconstitutional as a criminal statute because it is void for vagueness.  A statute that criminalizes all restraints of trade cannot be saved by the Supreme Court explaining what Congress really must have really meant. What passed constitutional muster when the Sherman Act was a misdemeanor[1] merits another look now that the statute carries a maximum jail time of 10 years in prison.

In Part II I discuss how I think the criminal element of the Sherman Act should be fixed.

 The Heir Locators Criminal Indictment May Make This Issue Topical

I want to explain why this topic has come to mind. The Antitrust Division’s heir locators investigation/prosecution garners little attention in the world of massive international cartel investigations, but an indictment in this investigation could have major implications for criminal antitrust prosecutions.[2]  In a recent development, the trial judge ruled that the criminal case should be tried under the Rule of Reason. It is possible this development will set off a chain of events that leads to the Supreme Court revisiting what is necessary for a criminal conviction under the Sherman Act.

Heir locator firms locate potential heirs to an estate from public records and agree to help with their claim in return for a contingency fee.  The amount of the contingency fee depends on factors such as the complexity of the claim, potential recovery etc.  Since the potential heirs are located from public records, they may be contacted by more than one heir locator firm.  According to the indictment, the defendants agreed to allocate customers on a “first to contact basis.”  The firm to which the customers were allocated would pay the firm that “backed off” a percentage of the contingency recovered.  The Division has obtained two guilty pleas in the investigation but defendants Kemp & Associates and its co-owner Daniel J. Mannix were indicted in August 2016 and have pled not guilty.

The indictment appears to be a straight forward customer allocation scheme—a per seviolation.  The defendants:

  • agreed, during those conversations and other communications, that when both co-conspirator companies contacted the same unsigned heir to an estate, the co-conspirator company that first contacted that heir would be allocated certain remaining heirs to that estate who had yet to sign a contract with an Heir Location Services provider;

  • agreed that the co-conspirator company to which heirs were allocated would pay to the other co-conspirator company a portion of the contingency fees ultimately collected from those allocated heirs;

If anything is a per se violation, customer allocation should earn the title.  It eliminates price competition and it can be an easier agreement to monitor/enforce than price fixing.  If you lose a customer you were supposed to get, you know it.  But, the defendants moved that the case should be tried under the rule of reason.  The briefs in the case were filed under seal so it is impossible at this point to understand the defendants’ argument and the government’s response.  Nonetheless, on June 21, 2017 U.S. District Judge David Sam heard oral argument and then granted the defendants’ motion that the case is subject to the rule of reason. He reserved judgment on the motion to dismiss “for further disposition pending the government’s further evaluation of the case.”

I predict that the Antitrust Division will not try a criminal case under the Rule of Reason.  The government will either seek an interlocutory appeal to reverse the district court’s ruling, or drop the case.  The Division is in a tough position because three defendants have already pled guilty.[3]  The Division will not lightly walk away from a prosecution where others have already taken a plea.  On the other hand, the Antitrust Division will not want a precedent that allows the defendant to raise the reasonableness of the conduct.  Defendants have argued in previous criminal cases that the restraint should be judged under a rule of reason, but the Division has had ample authority to beat that argument back.  But, what if the defendants go for the whole enchilada, and seek not just a rule of reason trial, but a complete dismissal of the charges?   It certainly would be helpful to the defendants to have a criminal case tried under the rule of reason, but it would be a home run, or antitrust Hall of Fame material to get the indictment dismissed in its entirety as unconstitutionally void for vagueness.

A Rule of Reason Criminal Case?

One reason the defendants may have moved for a rule of reason trial is that the Supreme Court has already said that this would be permissible.  In United States v. U.S. Gypsum,[4]the Supreme Court held that in a criminal prosecution under the Sherman Act that was subject to rule of reason analysis, “action undertaken with knowledge of its probable consequences and having the requisite anticompetitive effects can be a sufficient predicate for a finding of criminal liability under the antitrust laws.”[5]  That would seem to settle the question, but the Supreme Court has been rightly flexible with stare decisis in overruling numerous other “conventional wisdom” tenets in the antitrust area.  Think vertical restraints, maximum resale price maintenance and resale price maintenance as examples.[6]  Would the Supreme Court decide that a rule of reason criminal case (or a per se case) is unconstitutional.  Would an after-the-fact rule of reason determination (after a quick look?) (or full blown inquiry?) meet the “notice” standard required for a criminal statute?  But, what about the Gypsum required showing of intent of anticompetitive conduct?  Does that save the statute?  But what does that even mean?  Anticompetitive under the “consumer welfare model?”  Measured by the Chicago School?  Post Chicago School?  School of Rock?

I have a proposal to amend the elements of a Sherman Act criminal conviction that eliminates these questions/issues and is warranted in light of the 10-year maximum jail sentence.  (And not to forget, a corporation has paid a $500 million criminal fine.)

If the Restraint is Fraudulent—It’s Criminal

Every head of the Antitrust Division in recent memory has made statements such as, “price fixing, market allocation and bid rigging steal from, and commit fraud upon, American business and customers.”[7] Similarly, an Antitrust Division official has testified, “the [criminal] cases that we are charging and prosecuting are unmistakable fraud.”[8]  Simply put, the litmus test for criminality should be whether the restraint of trade also involves fraud (i.e. a per se violation).  The substantial hammer of justice –lengthy prison sentences, Red Notices, extradition, should be reserved for when a jury finds the defendant engaged in a restraint of trade that involved fraud.

Today, criminal antitrust indictments contain an element of fraud, because of [wise] prosecutorial discretion, not because of the dictates of the statute.  But, antitrust jurisprudence could have taken the path down a fraud requirement instead of veering off to a per se rule (a conclusive presumption that takes the issue of reasonableness out of the juries’ hand), and found that the criminality in the Sherman Act is confined to those agreements that have an element of fraud. Early cases interpreting what was an unreasonable restraint of trade were heading in that direction.

What we now call per se offenses were originally called fraud.  This was recognized as early as 1875 in Craft v. McConoughy,[9] a case involving a secret scheme to fix prices among four Illinois warehouses. The court stated, “To the public the four houses were held out as competing firms for business. Secretly they had conspired together.”[10]  The scheme enabled the parties “by secret and fraudulent means, to control the price of grain.”[11]  In the seminal antitrust case of United States v. Addyston Pipe,[12] the court found secret agreements to refrain from bidding to be a form of fraud: “It is well settled that an agreement between intending bidders at a public auction or a public letting not to bid against each other, and thus prevent competition, is a fraud.”[13] In McMullen v. Hoffman,[14] the Court refused to enforce a contract when one conspirator sued for his portion of the profits from a successful collusive bidding scheme. The Court explained that the agreement “tend[ed] to induce the belief that there really is competition . . . although the truth is that there is no such competition.”[15] The Court held that “the illegal character of the agreement is founded not alone upon the fact that it tends to lessen competition, but also upon the fact of the commission of a fraud by the parties in combining their interests and concealing the same.”[16] The Court distinguished a secret agreement from a known joint venture, where “[t]he public may obtain at least the benefit of the joint responsibility. . . . The public agents know then all that there is in the transaction, and can more justly estimate the motives of the bidders, and weigh the merits of the bid.”[17]  Over a century later, in response to a question as to whether antitrust crimes are crimes of moral turpitude, Antitrust Division Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer responded that “price-fixing, bid-rigging and market allocation agreements among companies that hold themselves out to the public as competitors are inherently deceptive and defraud consumers who expect the benefit of competition.”[18]

Drawing on the wisdom of early Supreme Court decisions and the recent pronouncements of the Antitrust Division, the demarcation between a restraint of trade that can subject the violator to civil penalties and one that subjects the violator to criminal penalties is whether there was an element of fraud.  The Sherman Act should reflect this, either by amendment in Congress, or by Supreme Court further interpretation of what the government is required to prove to subject the defendant to criminal penalties.   In a criminal case the government’s burden should include proving that the agreement was a restraint of trade where the agreement was actively concealed or where the defendant held him/itself out to the public as a competitor when in fact an agreement not to compete or limit competition had been reached without the knowledge of the customer.  In a previous article, I have labeled this standard Per Se Plus.[19]

How would the heir locators indictment fare under such a standard? It is hard to know for sure but the indictment suggests that customers shopped around or there would have been no need for an agreement at all.  And when customers got quotes from more than one company, the customer would reasonably assume there was competition.  And the fraud would be, as the Supreme Court said long ago, “in [the defendants] combining their interests and concealing the same.”

Conclusion

Would requiring the government to prove an element of fraud to obtain a criminal conviction make obtaining convictions more difficult?  The answer must be yes, but as a former Antitrust Division prosecutor, to convince a jury to convict you must argue that the crime wasn’t an “unreasonable restraint of trade” whatever the heck that is—but it was fraud by the lying cheating defendants.  There are benefits to the Antitrust Division that would flow from having to prove fraud, but that’s for another post. Here, I’ll end with this.  The crime should fit the punishment; and with punishment of up to ten years in prison for an individual and hundreds of millions of dollars for a corporation, the Sherman Act needs to be amended to include an element of fraud for a criminal conviction because it is currently unconstitutional.

Thanks for reading.

*********************************************************************************

[1] When the per se rule was announced in United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S 150 (1940). a jail sentence was virtually a non-existent possibility. The maximum sentence imposed on any of the convicted individual defendants in Socony Vacuum was a fine of $1000. See Daniel A. Crane, The Story of United States v. Socony Vacuum: Hot Oil and Antitrust in the Two New Deals, in ANTITRUST STORIES 107 (Eleanor M. Fox & Daniel A. Crane eds., 2007).

[2]  U.S. v. Kemp & Associates, Inc. and Daniel J. Mannix, Case: 2:16-cr-00403, (D. Utah 2016) (DS), available at  https://www.justice.gov/atr/file/887761/download.

[3]  Richard Blake agreed to plead guilty in January 2016 as part of a proposed plea agreement between the Antitrust Division and Blake.  His company was not charged, most likely because it had received leniency. California-based Brandenburger & Davis and its president Bradley Davis agreed to plead guilty in December 2015.

[4]  438 U.S. 422 (1978).

[5]  Gypsum, 438 U.S. at 444. fn 21.

[6] The Supreme Court stated in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., 551 U.S. 877, 899 (2007).   “Stare decisis is not as significant in this case, however, because the issue before us is the scope of the Sherman Act,” which the Court has treated as a common-law statute.  The Court has been receptive to reviewing the per se rule in light of “new circumstances and new wisdom.”  The severe loss of personal liberty and other consequences now at stake in a Sherman Act criminal case is a new circumstance that warrants an evolution in the application of the per se rule to criminal antitrust cases so that the test for liability will better match the evolution of the law on consequences

[7] Anne K. Bingaman, Assistant Att’y Gen., Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, The Clinton Administration: Trends in Criminal Antitrust Enforcement, Remarks Before the Corporate Counsel Inst. (Nov. 30, 1995), available at http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/speeches/0471.htm.

[8] Scott D. Hammond, Deputy Assistant Att’y Gen., Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep’t. of Justice, Transcript of Testimony Before the United States Sentencing Commission Concerning Proposed 2005 Amendments to Section 2R1.1 at 3 (Apr. 12, 2005), available at http://www.justice.gov/atr/public testimony/209071.pdf.

[9] 79 Ill. 346 (1875).

[10] Id. at 348.

[11] Id. at 349.

[12] 85 F. 271 (6th Cir. 1898).

[13] Id. at 293 (emphasis added) (citations omitted).

[14] 174 U.S. 639 (1899)

[15] Id. at 646.

[16] Id. at 649.

[17] Id. at 652 (citations omitted).

[18] Letter from Peter J. Kadzik, Principal Deputy Assistant Att’y Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to Senator Patrick Leahy Attaching Responses of William Baer, Assistant Att’y Gen. Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep’t of Justice to Questions for the Record Arising from the Nov. 14, 2013 Hearing of the Senate Comm. of the Judiciary Regarding Cartel Prosecution: Stopping Price Fixers and Protecting Consumers at 3 (Jan. 24, 2014) (emphasis added), available at http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/111413QFRs-Baer.pdf.

[19]  Robert E. Connolly, Per Se “Plus:” A Proposal to Revise the Per se Rule in Criminal Antitrust Cases, Antitrust, Vol. 29, No. 2, Spring 2015, p. 105.

Senior Executives Of Medical Drug Re-Packager Plead Guilty To Defrauding Healthcare Providers

Posted on by

Friday, July 14, 2017

President and Pharmacist-in-Charge Distributed Cancer Drugs Contaminated With Mold

Earlier today, in federal court in Brooklyn, Gerald Tighe, the president and owner of Med Prep Consulting Inc. (Med Prep), and Stephen Kalinoski, its director of pharmacy and registered pharmacist-in-charge, pleaded guilty to wire fraud conspiracy in connection with their operation of the now-defunct Tinton Falls, New Jersey-based medical drug re-packager and compounding pharmacy. The pleas were entered before United States District Judge I. Leo Glasser.

The guilty pleas were announced by Bridget M. Rohde, Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and Mark McCormack, Special Agent-in-Charge of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Office of Criminal Investigations, Metropolitan Washington Field Office (FDA/OCI).

According to court filings and facts presented during the plea proceeding, Med Prep processed numerous drugs, including oncology and dialysis drugs, pain medications, anesthesia drugs, and operating room drugs, in purportedly aseptic conditions. In an effort to gain market share, Med Prep repeatedly misrepresented to its customers, who consisted of hospitals and other healthcare providers, that it adhered to, and in some areas exceeded, industry standards and laws applicable to sterile drug preparation. In fact, Med Prep produced drugs in a facility that fell far short of basic industry standards of cleanliness, creating a risk to the health of already ill patients. Tighe and Kalinoski lied to healthcare providers about Med Prep’s failures to comply with basic sterility practices. Med Prep halted its production of drug products in the summer of 2013, following an incident in which it had distributed intravenous drugs containing visible mold to a Connecticut hospital.

“Today’s guilty pleas mark an important step in our continuing effort to hold accountable those who pursue corporate profits over the health and safety of vulnerable patients suffering from disease,” said Acting United States Attorney Rohde. In announcing the guilty plea, Ms. Rohde gratefully acknowledged the assistance and cooperation of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Office of Investigations; the United States Office of Personnel Management, Office of the Inspector General; the Department of Justice, Civil Division, Consumer Protection Branch and Commercial Litigation Branch; the FDA’s Office of the Chief Counsel; the Office of the Attorney General of New Jersey; and the New Jersey Board of Pharmacy.

“Producing unsafe and contaminated drugs poses a serious threat to the U.S. public health and cannot be tolerated,” stated FDA/OCI Special Agent-in-Charge McCormack. “The FDA remains fully committed to aggressively pursuing those who place unsuspecting American consumers at risk by distributing adulterated drugs.”

The sentencing, Tighe and Kalinoski each face up to five years in prison, a fine and the forfeiture of criminal proceeds. They will also be required to make full restitution to their victims.

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Alixandra E. Smith, Ameet B. Kabrawala and Erin E. Argo.

The Defendants:

GERALD TIGHE

Age: 59

West Long Branch, New Jersey

STEPHEN KALINOSKI

Age: 53

Middletown, New Jersey

E.D.N.Y. Docket No. 15-CR-62 (ILG)