Skip to main content

Owner of Texas Home Health Services Company Pleads Guilty, Admits Role in $374 Million Fraud Scheme

WASHINGTON—A Dallas-area home health services company owner today admitted his role in a $374 million home health fraud scheme in which he and others conspired to bill Medicare for unnecessary services that were never performed. Cyprian Akamnonu, 64, of Arlington, Texas, entered his guilty plea to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud before U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay in Dallas federal court.

The guilty plea was announced by Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas Sarah R. SaldaƱa; Special Agent in Charge Diego G. Rodriguez of the FBI’s Dallas Field Office; Special Agent in Charge Mike Fields of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General’s (HHS-OIG) Dallas Regional Office; and the Texas Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU).

According to court documents, beginning in at least January 2006, Akamnonu, along with his wife Pat Akamnonu, owned and operated Ultimate Care Home Health Services Inc. Cyprian Akamnonu admitted that he directed his wife and others to recruit Medicare beneficiaries from Dallas neighborhoods for home health services they did not need and for which they did not qualify. Once the beneficiaries were recruited, Cyprian Akamnonu would take prescriptions for home health services to the offices of Medistat Group Associates P.A., owned and operated by co-defendant Jacques Roy, M.D.

Cyprian Akamnonu admitted he brought the prescriptions to Roy because he and Roy had a fraudulent arrangement whereby Ultimate provided Roy with beneficiaries to bolster Medistat’s patient roster in exchange for Roy’s certification for skilled nursing services of any beneficiary brought to him. Roy’s office manager, co-defendant Teri Sivils, and others would allegedly then sign these prescriptions on Roy’s behalf. Cyprian Akamnonu admitted to paying Sivils cash to sign the prescriptions.

Cyprian Akamnonu admitted that once he obtained signed prescriptions, nurses acting at his direction would perform cursory visits for the beneficiaries they had recruited that bore little relationship to the skilled nursing services which Roy had purportedly prescribed. Ultimate would then bill Medicare, at Cyprian Akamnonu’s direction, for skilled nursing services that were not necessary and were not performed.

Court documents show that from January 2006 through November 2011, Roy or another Medistat physician allegedly certified over 78 percent of the beneficiaries serviced by Ultimate. Ultimate billed over $43 million to the Medicare program for these beneficiaries. Roy, in turn, allegedly incorporated these beneficiaries into his own practice and billed over $2.4 million for services related to them.

At sentencing, Cyprian Akamnonu faces a maximum potential penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine on the conspiracy count. Sentencing is currently scheduled for February 4, 2013. As part of his plea agreement, he has also agreed not to contest the forfeiture of 21 real properties, four automobiles, and funds in a number of personal and business accounts connected to proceeds of the fraud.

His six co-defendants, including his wife, await trial on related charges, currently set for June 2013. The charges and allegations contained in the indictment against them are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...