Indictment — United States v. Christopher Licata (Southern District of Florida, Document 3)
Summary
Indictment in United States of America v. Christopher Licata, Case No. 21-80063-CR-MIDDLEBROOKS/BRANNON, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, entered on the docket April 23, 2021 as Document 3. The general allegations describe the Medicare Program, Medicare Part B coverage rules, COVID-19 and respiratory pathogen panel testing, genetic testing, telemedicine, the shell lab rule, the Paycheck Protection Program and the Economic Injury Disaster Loan program. The cover lists 18 U.S.C. § 1349, § 1347, § 371, 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b(b)(2)(A), 18 U.S.C. § 1957(a), § 1343 and § 2. The penalty sheets list Count 1, 18 U.S.C. § 1349, conspiracy to commit health care fraud and wire fraud, with a maximum of twenty years' imprisonment, and Counts 13-15, 18 U.S.C. § 1957(a), money laundering, with a maximum of ten years' imprisonment as to each count. The document is 33 pages.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Indictment — United States v. Christopher Licata (Southern District of Florida, Document 3).”
Original at archive.org. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/court-filing-no-9-21-cr-80063-dkt-3-s-d-fla-65151edb73/
, SHA-256 aa8cc4ea8a36d00e7839b0ab5dfa3c113fe0c9380c71eb6042602d85e3e71d44.Full text
YH
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 1 of 33
Apr 22, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
21-80063-CR-MIDDLEBROOKS/BRANNON
Case No. -----------
18 u.s.c. § 1349
18 u.s.c. § 1347
18 u.s.c. § 371
42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b(b )(2)(A)
18 U.S.C. § 1957(a)
18 u.s.c. § 1343
18 u.s.c. § 2
18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(l), (a)(2)(A), (a)(7)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
vs.
CHRISTOPHER LICATA,
Defendant.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -I
INDICTMENT
The Grand Jury charges that:
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
At all times material to this Indictment:
Medicare Program
1. The Medicare Program ("Medicare") was a federally funded program that provided
free or below-cost health care benefits to certain individuals, primarily the elderly, blind, and
disabled. The benefits available under Medicare were governed by federal statutes and regulations.
The United States Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS"), through its agency, the
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS"), oversaw and administered Medicare.
Individuals who received benefits under Medicare were commonly referred to as Medicare
"beneficiaries."
1
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 2 of 33
2. Medicare was a "health care benefit program," as defined by Title 18, United States
Code, Section 24(b) and a "Federal health care program," as defined by Title 42, United States
Code, Section 1320a-7b(f).
3. Medicare covered different types of benefits, which were separated into different
program "parts." Medicare "Part A" covered health services provided by hospitals, skilled nursing
facilities, hospices, and home health agencies. Medicare "Part B" was a medical insurance
program that covered, among other things, medical services provided by physicians, medical
clinics, laboratories, and other qualified health care providers, such as office visits, minor surgical
procedures, and laboratory testing, that were medically necessary and ordered by licensed medical
doctors or other qualified health care providers.
4. Physicians, clinics, and other health care providers, including laboratories, that
provided services to beneficiaries were able to apply for and obtain a "provider number." A health
care provider that received a Medicare provider number was able to file claims with Medicare to
obtain reimbursement for services provided to beneficiaries.
5. A Medicare claim was required to contain certain important information, including:
(a) the beneficiary's name and Health Insurance Claim Number ("HICN"); (b) a description of the
health care benefit, item, or service that was provided or supplied to the beneficiary; (c) the billing
codes for the benefit, item, or service; (d) the date upon which the benefit, item, or service was
provided or supplied to the beneficiary; and (e) the name of the referring physician or other health
care provider, as well as a unique identifying number, known either as the Unique Physician
Identification Number ("UPIN") or National Provider Identifier ("NPI"). The claim form could
be submitted in hard copy or electronically.
2
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 3 of 33
Part B Coverage and Regulations
6. CMS acted through fiscal agents called Medicare administrative contractors
("MACs"), which were statutory agents for CMS for Medicare Part B. The MACs were private
entities that reviewed claims and made payments to providers for services rendered to
beneficiaries. The MACs were responsible for processing Medicare claims arising within their
assigned geographical area, including determining whether the claim was for a covered service.
7. First Coast Services Options, Inc. ("First Coast") was the MAC for the consolidated
Medicare jurisdictions that covered Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
8. To receive Medicare reimbursement, providers had to make appropriate application
to the MAC and execute a written provider agreement. The Medicare provider emollment
application, CMS Form 855B, was required to be signed by an authorized representative of the
provider. CMS Form 855B contained a certification that stated:
I agree to abide by the Medicare laws, regulations and program
instructions that apply to this supplier. The Medicare laws,
regulations, and program instructions are available through the
Medicare contractor. I understand that payment of a claim by
Medicare is conditioned upon the claim and the underlying
transaction complying with such laws, regulations, and program
instructions (including, but not limited to, the Federal anti-kickback
statute and the Stark law), and on the supplier's compliance with all
applicable conditions of participation in Medicare.
9. CMS Form 855B contained additional certifications that the provider "will not
knowingly present or cause to be presented a false or fraudulent claim for payment by Medicare,"
and "will not submit claims with deliberate ignorance or reckless disregard of their truth or falsity."
10. Payments under Medicare Part B were often made directly to the health care
provider rather than to the patient or beneficiary. For this to occur, the beneficiary would assign
the right of payment to the health care provider. Once such an assignment took place, the health
3
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 4 of 33
care provider would assume the responsibility for submitting claims to, and receiving payments
from, Medicare.
Laboratory Tests
COVID-19 Testing and Respiratory Pathogen Panel ("RPP") Testing
11. COVID-19 testing assessed whether an individual had the novel coronavirus
disease 2019, commonly referred to as "COVID-19."
12. RPP testing detected certain respiratory viruses and bacterial pathogens. The RPP
test did not and could not test for COVID-19. Medicare reimbursement rates for RPP testing were
approximately four times higher than Medicare reimbursement rates for the COVID-19 test.
Genetic Testing
13. Various forms of genetic testing existed using DNA sequencing to detect mutations
in genes that could indicate a higher risk of developing certain diseases or health conditions in the
future, including certain types of cancers (known as cancer genetic or "CGx" testing),
cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and dementia.
Pharmacogenetic tests ("PGx" tests) were laboratory tests that used DNA sequencing to assess
how the body's genetic makeup would affect the response to certain medications.
Medicare Regulations
14. Except for certain statutory exceptions, Medicare did not cover laboratory testing
that was "not reasonable and necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of illness or injury or to
improve the functioning of a malformed body member." Title 42, United States Code, Section
1395y(a)(l)(A).
15. Iflaboratory testing was necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of illness or injury
or to improve the functioning of a malformed body member, Medicare imposed additional
4
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 5 of 33
requirements before covering the testing. Title 42, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 410. 32(a)
provided, "All diagnostic x-ray tests, diagnostic laboratory tests, and other diagnostic tests must
be ordered by the physician who is treating the beneficiary, that is, the physician who furnishes a
consultation or treats a beneficiary for a specific medical problem and who uses the results in the
management of the beneficiary's specific medical problem." "Tests not ordered by the physician
who is treating the beneficiary are not reasonable and necessary." Id.
16. In or around May 2020, in response to the public health emergency for the COVID-
19 pandemic, Medicare amended Title 42, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 410.32(a) to
remove the requirement that COVID-19 tests and certain, defined RPP tests may be covered only
based on the order of a treating physician. Under the interim policy, Medicare covered COVID-
19 tests and certain, defined RPP tests when ordered by any healthcare professional authorized to
do so under state law. This interim policy did not amend Title 42, Code of Federal Regulations,
Section 410.32(a) as it applies to genetic testing.
Telemedicine
17. Telemedicine provided a means of connecting patients to doctors by usmg
telecommunications technology, such as the internet or telephone, to interact with a patient.
18. Telemedicine companies provided telemedicine services, or telehealth services, to
individuals by hiring doctors and other health care providers. Telemedicine companies typically
paid doctors a fee to conduct consultations with patients. In order to generate revenue,
telemedicine companies typically either billed insurance or received payment from patients who
utilized the services of the telemedicine company.
19. Medicare Part B covered expenses for specific telehealth services if certain
requirements were met. These requirements included that (a) the beneficiary was located in a rural
5
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 6 of 33
or health professional shortage area; (b) services were delivered via an interactive audio and video
telecommunications system; and (c) the beneficiary was in a practitioner's office or a specified
medical facility-not at a beneficiary's home-during the telehealth service with a remote
practitioner. In or around March 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, some of these
requirements were amended temporarily to, among other things, cover telehealth services for
certain office and hospital visits, even if the beneficiary was not located in a rural area or a health
professional shortage area and even if the telehealth services were furnished to beneficiaries in
their home.
Shell Lab Rule
20. Title 42, United States Code, Section 1395l(h)(5) provided that payment from
Medicare for covered clinical diagnostic laboratory tests may only be made to "the person or entity
which performed or supervised the performance of such test." If a test was "performed at the
request of a laboratory by another laboratory," the referring laboratory could only be paid by
Medicare for that test if "not more than 30 percent of the clinical diagnostic laboratory tests for
which such referring laboratory ... receives requests for testing during the year in which the test
is performed, are performed by another laboratory." Id. This was commonly called the "shell lab
rule," as it, in essence, precluded pass-through billing arrangements where a lab bills Medicare for
more than 30 percent of the tests that were actually performed by another lab.
Paycheck Protection Program and Economic Injury Disaster Relief Program
The Small Business Administration
21. The United States Small Business Administration ("SBA") was an executive-
branch agency of the United States government that provided support to entrepreneurs and small
businesses. The mission of the SBA was to maintain and strengthen the nation's economy by
6
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 7 of 33
enabling the establishment and viability of small businesses _and by assisting in the economic
recovery of communities after disasters.
22. As part of this effort, the SBA facilitated loans through banks, credit unions, and
other lenders. The federal government backed these loans.
The Paycheck Protection Program
23. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security ("CARES") Act was a federal
law enacted in or around March 2020 and designed to provide emergency financial assistance to
the millions of Americans who were suffering the economic effects caused by the COVID-19
pandemic. One source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the authorization of forgivable
loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through a program referred
to as the Paycheck Protection Program ("PPP").
24. In order to obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business had to submit a PPP loan
application, which was signed by an authorized representative of the business. The PPP loan
application required the business (through its authorized representative) to acknowledge the
program rules and make certain affirmative certifications in order to be eligible to obtain the PPP
loan. One such affirmative certification was that "[t]he Applicant is not engaged in an activity that
is illegal under federal, state or local law." In the PPP loan application (SBA Form 2483), the
small business (through its authorized representative) also was required to provide, among other
things, its: (a) average monthly payroll expenses; and (b) number of employees. These figures
were used to calculate the amount of money the small business was eligible to receive under the
PPP. In addition, businesses applying for a PPP loan were required to provide documentation
confirming their payroll expenses.
7
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 8 of 33
25. A PPP loan application was processed by a participating financial institution
("lender"). If a PPP loan application was approved, the participating lender funded the loan using
its own monies. While it was the participating lender that issued the PPP loan, the loan was 100%
guaranteed by the SBA. Data from the application, including information about the borrower, the
total amount of the loan, and the listed number of employees, was transmitted by the lender to the
SBA in the course of processing the loan.
26. PPP loan proceeds were required to be used by the business on certain permissible
expenses, including payroll costs, mortgage interest, rent, and utilities. Under the applicable PPP
rules and guidance, the interest and principal on the PPP loan was eligible for forgiveness if the
business was eligible for the PPP loan it received, spent the loan proceeds on these permissible
expense items within a designated period of time, and used a defined portion of the PPP loan
proceeds for payroll expenses.
The Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program
27. The Economic Injury Disaster Loan ("EIDL") program was an SBA program that
provided low-interest financing to small businesses, renters, and homeowners in regions affected
by declared disasters.
28. Another source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the authorization for the
SBA to provide EID Ls of up to $2 million to eligible small businesses experiencing substantial
financial disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the CARES Act authorized the
SBA to issue advances of up to $10,000 to small businesses within three days of applying for an
EIDL. The amount of the advance was determined by the number of employees the applicant
certified having. The advances did not have to be repaid.
8
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 9 of 33
29. In order to obtain an EIDL and advance, a qualifying business was required to
submit an application to the SBA and provide information about its operations, such as the number
of employees, gross revenues for the 12-month period preceding the disaster, and cost of goods
sold in the 12-monthperiod preceding the disaster. In the case ofEIDLs for COVID-19 relief, the
12-month period was that preceding January 31, 2020. The applicant was further required to
certify that it was not engaged in any illegal activity and that all of the information in the
application was true and correct to the best of the applicant's knowledge.
30. EIDL applications were submitted directly to the SBA and processed by the agency
with support from a government contractor, Rapid Finance. The amount of the loan, if the
application was approved, was determined based, in part, on the information provided by the
application about employment, revenue, and cost of goods, as described above. Any funds issued
under an EIDL or advance were issued directly by the SBA. EIDL funds could be used for payroll
expenses, sick leave, production costs, and business obligations, such as debts, rent, and mortgage
payments. If the applicant also obtained a loan under the PPP, the EIDL funds could not be used
for the same purpose as the PPP funds.
Relevant Lending Institution
31. Lender 1 was a financial institution within the meaning of Title 18, United States
Code, Section 20, with accounts insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and
headquartered in New Jersey. Lender 1 was authorized to participate as a lender in the PPP by the
SBA.
The Defendant and Related Entities
32. Boca Toxicology, LLC (d/b/a Lab Dynamics) ("Boca Toxicology") was a limited
liability company formed under the laws of Florida, with its principal place of business in Palm
9
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 10 of 33
Beach County, Florida, and held a bank account ending in 7233 at TD Bank (the "Boca Toxicology
Account").
33. Boca Toxicology purportedly provided genetic, RPP, COVID-19, and other
laboratory testing services to beneficiaries.
34. Corporate Boca Tox CL Inc. was a company incorporated under the laws of
Delaware, and held a bank account ending in 7613 at TD Bank (the "Corporate Boca Tox CL
Account").
35. Defendant CHRISTOPHER LICATA, a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida,
was the owner of Boca Toxicology and Corporate Boca Tox CL Inc. LICATA held an account at
E-Trade Financial Securities LLC ending in 0417 (the "CHRISTOPHER LICATA Account").
36. Company A was a company incorporated under the laws of Florida, with its
principal place of business in Broward County, Florida.
37. Individual A and Individual B, both residents of Broward County, Florida, co-
owned Company A. Individual A held an account ending in 8592 at USAA Bank (the "Individual
A Account").
3 8. Company B was a company incorporated under the laws of Florida, with its
principal place of business in Palm Beach County, Florida.
39. Individual C, a resident of Palm Beach County, owned and operated Company B.
COUNTl
Conspiracy to Commit Health Care Fraud and Wire Fraud
(18 u.s.c. § 1349)
1. Paragraphs 1 through 20, 32 through 33, and 35 through 39 of the General
Allegations section of this Indictment are re-alleged and incorporated by reference as though fully
set forth herein.
10
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 11 of 33
2. From in or around December 2018, and continuing through the return of this
Indictment, in Palm Beach County, in the Southern District of Florida, and elsewhere, the
defendant,
CHRISTOPHER LICATA,
did knowingly and willfully, that is, with the intent to further the objects of the conspiracy,
combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with Individual A, Individual B, Individual C, and
others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to commit offenses against the United States, that
1s:
a. to knowingly and willfully execute a scheme and artifice to defraud a health care
benefit program affecting commerce, as defined in Title 18, United States Code, Section 24(b),
that is, Medicare, and to obtain, by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses,
representations, and promises, money and property owned by, and under the custody and control
of, said health care benefit program, in connection with the delivery of and payment for health care
benefits, items, and services, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1347; and
b. to knowingly, and with intent to defraud, devise, and intend to devise, a scheme
and artifice to defraud, and for obtaining money and property by means of materially false and
fraudulent pretenses, representations, and promises, knowing the pretenses, representations, and
promises were· false and fraudulent when made, and for the purpose of executing the scheme and
artifice, to knowingly transmit and cause to be transmitted by means of wire communication in
interstate and foreign commerce, certain writings, signs, signals, pictures and sounds, in violation
of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343.
11
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 12 of 33
Purpose of the Conspiracy
3. It was a purpose of the conspiracy for the defendant and his co-conspirators to
unlawfully enrich themselves by, among other things: (a) paying and receiving kickbacks in
exchange for the referral of beneficiaries, COVID-19, RPP, genetic, and other tests, and doctors'
orders and other documentation necessary to submit claims to Medicare (collectively, "doctors'
orders") to Boca Toxicology so that Boca Toxicology could bill Medicare for the testing
purportedly provided to these beneficiaries, without regard to whether the beneficiaries needed the
tests or whether the tests were eligible for Medicare reimbursement; (b) paying and causing the
payment of kickbacks to telemedicine companies in exchange for ordering and arranging for the
ordering of genetic testing for beneficiaries, without regard to the medical necessity of the
prescribed tests or whether the tests were eligible for Medicare reimbursement; (c) submitting and
causing the submission, via interstate wire communication, of false and fraudulent claims to
Medicare through Boca Toxicology for genetic testing and RPP testing that was not medically
necessary and not eligible for reimbursement; (d) concealing the submission of false and fraudulent
claims to Medicare; and (e) diverting fraud proceeds for their personal use and benefit, the use and
benefit of others, and to further the fraud.
Manner and Means of the Conspiracy
The manner and means by which the defendant and his co-conspirators sought to
accomplish the objects and purpose of the conspiracy included, among other things:
4. CHRISTOPHER LICATA falsely certified to Medicare that he, as well as Boca
Toxicology, would comply with all Medicare rules and regulations and federal laws, including the
shell lab rule, the Anti-Kickback Statute, the requirement to not knowingly present or cause to be
12
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 13 of 33
presented a false and fraudulent claim for payment by Medicare, and the requirement to not submit
claims with deliberate ignorance or reckless disregard of their truth or falsity.
5. CHRISTOPHER LICATA and his co-conspirators, through Boca Toxicology,
paid and caused to be paid kickbacks and bribes to co-conspirators, including Individual A,
Individual B, Individual C, and others, in exchange for referring beneficiaries, COVID-19, RPP,
genetic, and other tests and corresponding doctors' orders to Boca Toxicology so that Boca
Toxicology could submit claims, via interstate wire communication, to Medicare for the tests.
6. As a result of the kickbacks and bribes that CHRISTOPHER LICATA paid
Individual A, Individual B, Individual C, and other co-conspirators, through Boca Toxicology, in
exchange for referring beneficiaries to Boca Toxicology, LI CATA denied beneficiaries the ability
to choose which laboratory, if any, they desired to perform their laboratory testing.
7. CHRISTOPHER LICATA, Individual A, Individual B, Individual C, and other
co-conspirators created and caused to be created sham documentation that disguised the kickbacks
and bribes, as payment from Boca Toxicology for other services, such as for legitimate
employment and for hourly marketing services.
8. CHRISTOPHER LICATA instructed his co-conspirators, including Individual A,
Individual B, and others, to obtain doctors' orders for specific types of genetic tests, in effect
selecting which genetic tests the recruited beneficiaries received. LICATA selected the genetic
tests based:on how much Medicare reimbursed for the tests, irrespective of medical necessity and
eligibility for Medicare reimbursement, and for the purpose of maximizing reimbursements.
9. CHRISTOPHER LICATA instructed his co-conspirators, including Individual A,
Individual B, and others, that if they referred beneficiaries to Boca Toxicology for COVID-19
testing, they should also obtain doctors' orders for more expensive, but medically unnecessary,
13
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 14 of 33
RPP tests, because the COVID-19 tests did not reimburse at a sufficiently high rate, and the RPP
tests reimbursed at a higher rate.
10. CHRISTOPHER LICATA, Individual A, Individual B, and other co-conspirators
obtained doctors' orders for COVID-19, RPP, and genetic testing from Individual B's father, a
medical doctor, who often authorized the tests without properly consulting with the beneficiaries
about the specific tests being performed, the purposes of those tests, the need for the tests, and the
risks of the test, and did not use the test results in the treatment of the beneficiaries.
11. CHRISTOPHER LICATA, Individual A, Individual B, and other co-conspirators
offered and paid, and caused to be paid, illegal kickbacks and bribes to telemedicine companies in
exchange for doctors' orders for laboratory tests, including genetic tests, that were not medically
necessary and not eligible for Medicare reimbursement. The orders were written by doctors
contracted with the telemedicine companies, even though those doctors had no prior relationship
with the beneficiaries, were not treating the beneficiaries, did not use the test results in the
treatment of the beneficiaries, and often did not conduct a proper telemedicine visit.
12. CHRISTOPHER LICATA, Individual A, Individual B~ and other co-conspirators
caused Boca Toxicology to submit false and fraudulent claims to Medicare, via interstate wire
communication, in at least the approximate amount of $8,424,141 for genetic tests that were
induced through kickbacks, designed for maximum reimbursement, not medically necessary, and
not eligible for reimbursement. As the result of these false and fraudulent claims, Medicare made
payments to Boca Toxicology for genetic testing in at least the approximate amount of $3,394,011.
13.: CHRISTOPHER LICATA, Individual A, Individual B, and other co-conspirators
caused Boca Toxicology to submit false and fraudulent claims to Medicare, via interstate wire
communication, in at least the approximate amount of $260,975 for RPP tests that were induced
14
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 15 of 33
through kickbacks, designed for maximum reimbursement, not medically necessary, and not
eligible for reimbursement. As the result of these false and fraudulent claims, Medicare made
payments to Boca Toxicology for RPP testing in at least the approximate amount of $148,494.
14: In total, CHRISTOPHER LICATA, Individual A, Individual B, and other co-
conspirators caused Boca Toxicology to submit claims to Medicare in at least the approximate
amount of $9,321,875, via interstate wire communication. Medicare made payments to Boca
Toxicology in at least the approximate amount of $3,775,510.
15. CHRISTOPHER LICATA, Individual A, Individual B, and other co-conspirators
used the fraud proceeds received from Medicare to benefit themselves and others, and to further
the fraud. ;
AU in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349.
COUNTS2-6
Health Care Fraud
(18 u.s.c. § 1347)
1. Paragraphs 1 through 20, 32 through 33, and 35 through 39 of the General
Allegations section of this Indictment are re-alleged and incorporated by reference as though fully
set forth herein.
2. From in or around December 2018, and continuing through the return of this
Indictment, in Palm Beach County, in the Southern District of Florida, and elsewhere, the
defendant, '
CHRISTOPHER LICATA,
in connection with the delivery of and payment for health care benefits, items, and services, did
knowingly and willfully execute, and attempt to execute, a scheme and artifice to defraud a health
care benefit program affecting commerce, as defined in Title 18, United States Code, Section
15
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 16 of 33
24(b), tha~ is, Medicare, and to obtain by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses,
!
representations, and_promises, money and property owned by, and under the custody and control
of, said healthcare benefit program.
Purpose of the Scheme and Artifice
3. It was a purpose of the scheme and artifice for the defendant and his accomplices
to unlawfully enrich themselves by, among other things: (a) paying and receiving kickbacks in
exchange for the referral of beneficiaries, COVID-19, RPP, genetic, and other test kits, and
doctors' orders to Boca Toxicology so that Boca Toxicology could bill Medicare for the testing
purportedly provided to these beneficiaries, without regard to whether the beneficiaries needed the
tests or whether the tests were eligible for Medicare reimbursement; (b) paying and causing the
payment of kickbacks to telemedicine companies in exchange for ordering and arranging for the
ordering of genetic testing for beneficiaries, without regard to the medical necessity of the
prescribed tests or whether the tests were eligible for Medicare reimbursement; (c) submitting and
causing the submission, via interstate wire communication, of false and fraudulent claims to
'
Medicare through Boca Toxicology for genetic testing and RPP testing that was not medically
necessary and not eligible for reimbursement; (d) concealing the submission of false and fraudulent
claims to Medicare; and (e) diverting fraud proceeds for their personal use and benefit, the use and
benefit of qthers, and to further the fraud.
The Scheme and Artifice
4. ' The Manner and Means section of Count 1 of this Indictment is re-alleged and
'
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein as a description of the scheme and
artifice.
16
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 17 of 33
Acts in Execution or Attempted Execution
of the Scheme and Artifice
5. On or about the dates set forth as to each count below, in Palm Beach County, in
the Southern District of Florida and elsewhere, the defendant,
CHRISTOPHER LICATA,
in connection with the delivery of and payment for health care benefits, items, and services, did
knowingly and willfully execute, and attempt to execute, the above-described scheme and artifice
to defraud a health care benefit program affecting commerce, as defined by Title 18, United States
Code, Section 24(b), that is, Medicare, and to obtain, by means of materially false and fraudulent
pretenses, representations, and promises, money and property owned by, and under the custody
and control of, said health care benefit program, in that the defendant submitted and caused the
submission of false and fraudulent claims, seeking the identified dollar amounts, and representing
that such benefits, items, and services were medically necessary, eligible for Medicare
reimbursement, and provided to beneficiaries as claimed:
Approx. Date Description for Highest
Count Beneficiary of Submission Claim No. Billed Test; Total
of Claim Approx. Amount Billed
Gene analysis (BRCAl
2 M.L. 5/24/2019 591019144831610
and 2); $9,771
Gene analysis (Noonan
3 S.S. 3/3/2020 591020063741200
Syndrome); $15,083
Molecular Pathology
4 S.A. 4/23/2020 590920114482670
Procedure Level 9; $8,314
5 H.S. 5/7/2020 591020140273110 RPP; $1,091
6 M.S. 5/14/2020 591020135066900 RPP; $1,091
17
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 18 of 33
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1347 and 2.
COUNT7
Conspiracy to Defraud the United States and to Pay Health Care Kickbacks
(18 u.s.c. § 371)
1. Paragraphs 1 through 20, 32 through 33, and 35 through 39 of the General
Allegations section of this Indictment are re-alleged and incorporated by reference as though fully
set forth herein.
2. From in or around December 2018, and continuing through the return of this
Indictment, in Palm Beach County, in the Southern District of Florida, and elsewhere, the
defendant,
CHRISTOPHER LICATA,
did knowingly and willfully, that is, with the intent to further the objects of the conspiracy,
combine, conspire, confederate, and agree with Individual A, Individual B, and others known and
unknown tb the Grand Jury to defraud the United States by impairing, impeding, obstructing, and
defeating through deceitful and dishonest means, the lawful government functions of the HHS in
its administration and oversight of the Medicare program; and to commit an offense against the
United States, that is, to violate Title 42, United States Code, Section l 320a-7b(b)(2)(A), by
offering and paying any remuneration, including kickbacks and bribes, directly and indirectly,
I
overtly anq covertly, in cash and in kind, to a person to induce such person to refer an individual
to a persoti for the furnishing and arranging for the furnishing of any item and service for which
payment may be made in whole and in part by a Federal health care program, that is, Medicare.
I
I
Purpose of the Conspiracy
3. i It was a purpose of the conspiracy for the defendant and his co-conspirators to
I
unlawfully emich themselves by: (a) soliciting, receiving, offering, and paying kickbacks and
18
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 19 of 33
bribes in ~etum for recruiting and referring beneficiaries to Boca Toxicology; (b) submitting and
causing the submission of claims to Medicare for COVID-19, RPP, genetic, and other forms of
I
laboratory testing that Boca Toxicology purported to provide to those beneficiaries; (c) concealing
the submission of false and fraudulent claims to Medicare; and ( d) diverting fraud proceeds for
their personal use and benefit, the use and benefit of others, and to further the fraud.
Manner and Means
The manner and means by which the defendant and his co-conspirators sought to
accomplish the objects and purpose of the conspiracy included, among other things, the following:
4. i Co-conspirators, including Individual A, Individual B, and others, recruited and
'
referred beneficiaries to Boca Toxicology, knowing that Boca Toxicology would bill Medicare for
''
COVID-19, RPP, genetic, and other forms of laboratory testing purportedly provided to the
recruited beneficiaries.
5. CHRISTOPHER LICATA, through Boca Toxicology, offered and paid at least
$238,240 in kickbacks to co-conspirators, including Individual A, Individual B, and others, in
exchange for the recruitment and referral of beneficiaries to Boca Toxicology, knowing that Boca
Toxicology would bill for testing purportedly provided to the recruited beneficiaries.
6. CHRISTOPHER LICATA, Individual A, Individual B, and other co-conspirators
created anq caused to be created sham documentation that disguised the kickbacks and bribes as
payments from Boca Toxicology for other services, including legitimate employment and for
hourly marketing services.
II
I
7. CHRISTOPHER LICATA, Individual A, Individual B, and other co-conspirators
caused Boca Toxicology to submit claims to Medicare, via interstate wire communications, in at
19
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 20 of 33
'
'
least the ~pproximate amount of $9,321,875 for COVID-19, RPP, genetic, and other forms of
'
laboratory: testing that were induced through kickbacks and bribes.
8. As a result of these claims, Medicare made payments to Boca Toxicology in at least
the approximate amount of $3,774,510.
9. CHRISTOPHER LICATA used the fraud proceeds received from Boca
Toxicology to benefit himself and others, and to further the fraud.
Overt Acts
In furtherance of the conspiracy, and to accomplish its objects and purpose, at least one co-
conspiratoi- committed and caused to be committed, in the Southern District of Florida, at least one
'
of the following overt acts, among others:
1. On or about May 7, 2018, CHRISTOPHER LICATA signed CMS Form 855B,
in which he ~ertified that, among other things, Boca Toxicology would comply with the federal
'
Anti-Kickback Statute.
2. In or around January 2019, CHRISTOPHER LICATA, Individual A, Individual
B, and Ind~vidual C negotiated an arrangement whereby Company A would receive approximately
45% of th,e amount that Medicare reimbursed for testing for beneficiaries ·Individual A and
I
Individual B referred to Boca Toxicology.
1
Under the agreed arrangement, payments from
LICATA to Individual A and Individual B would flow through Individual C, who the parties
agreed wo"9-ld receive 10% of what Medicare reimbursed, to be paid to Company B, in exchange
I
for Individµal C's role in brokering the agreement.
'
I
I
3. ! On or about April 29, 2019, CHRISTOPHER LICATA signed check no. 687 in
the amoun~ of approximately $5,000 from the Boca Toxicology Account made payable to
20
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 21 of 33
CompanyiB, which was a kickback for beneficiaries Individual A and Individual B referred to
Boca Tox~cology for laboratory testing.
4. On or about April 30, 2019, Individual A emailed Individual C a false and
fraudulent invoice from Company A to Company B, which was prepared in order to disguise the
'
kickback payment from CHRISTOPHER LICATA that Company B would be passing on to
Company A. The invoice falsely reflected that Company A had performed "Genomics education
and assessments" for 10 hours at the rate of $450 per hour, for a total of $4,500.
5. ·• On or about May 1, 2019, Company B transferred approximately $4,500 to
Company A via wire transfer, which represented the portion of the kickback CHRISTOPHER
'
LICATA bwed to Company A.
6. : On or about June 8, 2019, CHRISTOPHER LICATA signed check no. 710 in the
amount ofapproximately $5,000 from the Boca Toxicology Account made payable to Company
B, which was a kickback for beneficiaries Individual A and Individual B referred to Boca
Toxicology for laboratory testing.
7. On or about June 11, 2019, Individual A emailed Individual C a false and fraudulent
invoice from Company A to Company B, which was prepared in order to disguise the kickback
payment from CHRISTOPHER LICATA that Company B would be passing on to Company A.
The invoi6e falsely reflected that Company A had performed "Genomics education and
i
assessments" for 10 hours at the rate of $450 per hour, for a total of $4,500.
8. On or about June 12, 2019, Company B transferred approximately $4,470 to
Company A via wire transfer, which represented the portion of the kickback CHRISTOPHER
LICATA owed to Company A, minus the wire transfer fee.
21
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 22 of 33
9. i On or about July 3, 2019, after CHRISTOPHER LICATA had observed the
volume of referrals from Individual A and Individual B for several months, LICATA sent an
iMessage to Individual A enclosing a copy oflnternal Revenue Service ("IRS") Form W-4, so that
Individual' A could be reflected as a salaried employee of Boca Toxicology, when in fact Individual
A was not an employee of Boca Toxicology. LICATA and Individual A negotiated a monthly
salary of approximately $24,000 to reflect the historical volume of referrals and the taxes that
IndividualA would have to pay on salary payments. LICATA and Individual A agreed that only
Individual A, not Individual B, would be reflected as an employee and that Individual A would
i
'
split the p1µ1Jorted
I
salary payments with Individual B.
I
l
10. On or about July 3, 2019, Individual A sent an iMessage to CHRISTOPHER
LICATA :µoting that, under the employment arrangement, Individual A would be "[l]oosing [sic]
3500 in fiqa and taxes[.] Ouch[.]" In response, LICATA reassured Individual A that Individual
I
A "will ge~ bonuses as time goes on with sales performance."
I
1U On or about July 12, 2019, CHRISTOPHER LICATA signed check no. 10002 in
the amount of approximately $7,199 from the Boca Toxicology Account made payable to
Individual :A, which represented a kickback payment in exchange for beneficiaries Individual A
and Individual B referred to Boca Toxicology for laboratory testing.
12. On or about September 20, 2019, CHRISTOPHER LICATA caused
approximately $8,473 to be paid into the Individual A Account, in the form of a direct deposit
I
from Payr9ll Company 1 that was funded by the Boca Toxicology Account, which represented a
kickback payment in exchange for beneficiaries Individual A and Individual B referred to Boca
Toxicology for laboratory testing.
22
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 23 of 33
13 I
On or about June 25, 2020, Individual A sent iMessages to CHRISTOPHER
LICATA ~ontaining a breakdown of testing that Boca Toxicology had performed for beneficiaries
that Individual A and Individual B had referred to Boca Toxicology in or around April and May
2020. Individual A informed LICATA that in April 2020 the beneficiaries had received the
following tests: "l CGX[,] 1 Diabetes[,] 2 PGX[,] 75 RPP - all Medicare[,] 21 UTI[,] 1 Wound,"
and noted :that "The molecular alone cover 75k." Individual A also informed LICATA that in
May 2020ithe beneficiaries had received the following tests: "7 diabetes[,] 1 CGx[,] 18 urines[,]
'
and 193 cbvid/rpp[.]" Based on these numbers, Individual A asked LICATA, "How are you
I .
1
loosing[?] 1[sic] ... The rpp alone covers the 75k."
I
14.i On or about June 25, 2020, CHRISTOPHER LICATA caused approximately
!
i
$7,944 to pe paid into the Individual A Account, in the form of a direct deposit from Payroll
Company :1 that was funded by the Boca Toxicology Account, which represented a kickback
!
payment in exchange for beneficiaries Individual A and Individual B referred to Boca Toxicology.
AU:in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371.
I
COUNTS 8-12
P~yment of Kickbacks in Connection with a Federal Health Care Program
(42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b(b)(2)(A))
I. Paragraphs 1 through 20, 32 through 33, and 35 through 39 of the General
Allegation~ section of this Indictment are re-alleged and incorporated by reference as though fully
set forth hd.rein.
2. . On or about the dates enumerated below, in Palm Beach County, in the Southern
District of Florida, and elsewhere, the defendant,
CHRISTOPHER LICATA,
23
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 24 of 33
did knowingly and willfully offer and pay any remuneration, that is, kickbacks and bribes, directly
and indirectly, overtly and covertly, in cash and in kind, as set forth below, to a person, to induce
such person to refer an individual to a person for the furnishing and arranging for the furnishing
of any item and service for which payment may be made in whole and in part under a Federal
health care program, that is, Medicare:
Approx. Date of Approx. Amt. of
Count Kickback Kickback Description of Kickback Payment
Payment Payment
Check no. 687 from the Boca Toxicology
8 4/29/2019 $5,000
Account made payable to Company B.
Check no. 710 from the Boca Toxicology
9 6/8/2019 $5,000
Account made payable to Company B.
Check no. 10002 from the Boca Toxicology
10 7/12/2019 $7,199
Account made payable to Individual A.
Direct deposit from Payroll Company 1,
11 9/20/2019 $8,473 withdrawn from the Boca Toxicology
Account, to the Individual A Account.
Direct deposit from Payroll Company 1,
12 6/25/2020 $7,944 withdrawn from the Boca Toxicology
Account, to the Individual A Account.
In violation of Title 42, United States Code, Section 1320a-7b(b)(2)(A) and Title 18,
United States Code, Section 2.
COUNTS 13-15
Money Laundering
(18 U.S.C. § 1957(a))
1. The Paragraphs 1 through 20, 32 through 33, and 35 through 39 of the General
Allegations section of this Indictment are re-alleged and incorporated by reference as though fully
set forth herein.
2. On or about the dates set forth as to each count below, in Palm Beach County, in
the Southern District of Florida, and elsewhere, the defendant,
CHRISTOPHER LICATA,
24
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 25 of 33
did knowingly engage and attempt to engage in a monetary transaction affecting interstate
commerce, by, through, and to a financial institution, in criminally derived property of a value
greater than $10,000, and such property having been derived from specified unlawful activity,
knowing that the property involved in the monetary transaction was derived from some form of
unlawful activity:
Approx. Date Approx. Amount Description of Monetary
Count
of Transaction of Transaction Transaction
Bank transfer from the Boca
13 7/17/2019 $200,000 Toxicology Account to the Corporate
Boca Tox CL Account.
Bank transfer from the Boca
14 8/5/2019 $100,000 Toxicology Account to the Corporate
Boca Tox CL Account.
Wire transfer from the Corporate
Boca Tox CL Account to the
15 8/5/2019 $300,000
CHRISTOPHER LICATA
Account.
It is further alleged that the specified unlawful activity is conspiracy to commit health care
fraud and wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349; health care fraud,
in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1347; and payment of kickbacks in connection
with a Federal health care program, in violation of Title 42, United States Code, l 320a-7b.
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1957(a) and 2.
COUNTS 16-17
Wire Fraud
(18 u.s.c. § 1343)
1. The General Allegations section of this Indictment is re-alleged and incorporated
by reference as if fully set forth herein.
25
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 26 of 33
2. From in or around March 2020, and continuing through the return of this
Indictment, in Palm Beach County, in the Southern District of Florida, and elsewhere, the
defendant,
CHRISTOPHER LICATA,
did knowingly, and with intent to defraud, devise, and intend to devise, a scheme and artifice to
defraud, and to obtain money and property by means of materially false and fraudulent pretenses,
representations, and promises, knowing that the pretenses, representations, and promises were
false and fraudulent when made, and, for the purpose of executing the scheme and artifice, did
knowingly transmit and cause to be transmitted, by means of wire communication in interstate and
foreign commerce, certain writings, signs, signals, pictures, and sounds, in violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1343.
Purpose of the Scheme and Artifice
3. It was a purpose of the scheme and artifice for the defendant and his accomplices
to unlawfully enrich themselves by: (a) submitting and causing the submission, via interstate wire
communication, of false and fraudulent applications for loans and grants made available through.
the SBA to provide relief for the economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, including
a PPP loan and an EIDL; (b) diverting fraud proceeds for their personal use, the use and benefit of
others, and to further the fraud; and (c) concealing and causing the concealment of these false and
fraudulent applications.
The Scheme and Artifice
4. On or about March 30, 2020, CHRISTOPHER LICATA submitted, and caused
the submission of, an EIDL intake application in the name of Boca Toxicology seeking an EIDL
(the "EIDL Application"). In the EIDL Application, LICATA falsely represented, among other
26
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 27 of 33
things, that Boca Toxicology was "not engaged in any illegal activity," that Boca Toxicology's
gross revenues for the twelve months prior to the date of the disaster were $1,600,000, and that
Boca Toxicology's cost of goods sold for the twelve months prior to the date of the disaster were
$800,000.
5. On or about April 24, 2020, CHRISTOPHER LICATA submitted, and caused the
submission of, a PPP loan application in the name of Boca Toxicology seeking a PPP loan in the
amount of approximately $50,250 (the "PPP Application"). In the PPP Application, LICATA
falsely represented that "[t]he Applicant is not engaged in an activity that is illegal under federal,
state or local law" and that Boca Toxicology had seven employees and an average monthly payroll
of approximately $20,100.
6. As a result of the false and fraudulent PPP Application, Lender 1 approved and
funded the PPP loan. On or about May 5, 2020, Lender 1 transferred approximately $50,250 to
the Boca Toxicology Account.
7. As a result of the false and fraudulent EDIL Application, SBA approved the EIDL.
On or about May 14, 2020, CHRISTOPHER LICATA submitted, and caused the submission of,
an EIDL Loan Authorization and Agreement (the "EIDL Loan Agreement"), seeking an EIDL in
the approximate amount of $150,000. In the EIDL Loan Agreement, LICATA falsely certified
that "[a]ll representations in the Borrower's Loan application (including all supplementary
submissions) are true, correct and complete and are offered to induce SBA to make this Loan."
8. On or about May 18, 2020, in reliance on false representations made in the EIDL
Application and EIDL Loan Agreement, the SBA deposited $7,000 in the form of an EIDL
advance into the Boca Toxicology Account. On or about May 18, 2020, in reliance on false and
27
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 28 of 33
fraudulent representations made in the EIDL Application and EIDL Loan Agreement, the SBA
deposited approximately $149,900 into the Boca Toxicology Account.
Use of Wires
9. On or about the dates specified as to each count below, in Palm Beach County, in
the Southern District of Florida, and elsewhere, CHRISTOPHER LICATA, for the purpose of
executing and in furtherance of the aforementioned scheme and artifice to defraud, and to obtain
money and property by means of materially false and :fraudulent pretenses, representations, and
promises, ·knowing that the pretenses, representations, and promises were false and fraudulent
when made, did knowingly transmit and cause to be transmitted by means of wire communication
in interstate and foreign commerce certain writings, signs, signals, pictures, and sounds, as
described below:
Count Approx. Date of Description of Wire
Application
Electronic transmission from
CHRISTOPHER LICATA to Lender 1,
16 4/24/2020
through servers outside of Florida, of the
PPP Application for Boca Toxicology.
Electronic transmission from
CHRISTOPHER LICATA to the SBA,
17 5/14/2020 through servers outside of Florida, of the
EIDL Loan Agreement for Boca
Toxicology,
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1343 and 2.
FORFEITURE ALLEGATIONS
(18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(l), (a)(2)(A), (a)(7))
1. The allegations of this Indictment are re-alleged and by this reference fully
incorporated herein for alleging criminal forfeiture to the United States of certain property in which
the defendant, CHRISTOPHER LICATA, has an interest.
28
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 29 of 33
2. Upon conviction of a violation of, or a criminal conspiracy to violate, a "Federal
health care offense," as defined in Title 18, United States Code, Section 24(a), as alleged in Counts
1 through 12, the defendant shall forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States
Code, Section 982(a)(7), any property, real or personal, that constitutes or is derived, directly or
indirectly, from gross proceeds traceable to such violation.
3. Upon a conviction of a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1957(a),
as alleged in Counts 13 through 15 of this Indictment, the defendant shall forfeit to the United
States of America, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(l), any property, real
or personal, involved in such violation, and any property traceable to such property.
4. Upon conviction of a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343, as
alleged in Counts 16 and 17 of this Indictment, the defendant shall forfeit to the United States of
America, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(a)(2)(A), any property constituting
or derived from, proceeds obtained directly or indirectly, as the result of such violation.
5. The property, which is subject to criminal forfeiture includes, but is not limited to,
the following:
(a) All principal, deposits, interest, dividends, and any other amounts credited
to account number 4318547233 held at TD Bank, N.A., in the name of Boca Toxicology;
(b) All principal, deposits, interest, dividends, and any other amounts credited
to account number 437-7125715 held at TD Bank, N.A., in the name of Boca Toxicology;
(c) All principal, deposits, interest, dividends, and any other amounts credited
to account ;number 4280257613 held at TD Bank, N.A. in the name of Corporate Boca Tox CL
Inc; and
29
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 30 of 33
(d) All principal, deposits, interest, dividends and any other amounts credited
to account number 3596-0417 held at E-Trade Financial Securities LLC in the name of
CHRISTOPHER LICATA.
All pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Sections 982(a)(l), 982(a)(2)(A), and
982(a)(7), and the procedures outlined at Title 21, United States Code, Section 853, as made
applicable by Title 18, United States Code, Section 982(6)(1 ).
A TRUE BILL
FOREPERSON
DANIEL KAHN
ACTING CHIEF
CRIMINAL DIVISION, FRAUD SECTION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
ALLAN MEDINA
DEPUTY CHIEF
CRIMINAL DIVISION, FRAUD SECTION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
~j\ fr,-.
JAMIEDE~
TRIAL ATTORNEY
CRIMINAL DIVISION, FRAUD SECTION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
30
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 31 of 33
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURf
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
UNITED ST ATES OF AMERICA CASE NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
v.
CERTIFICATE OF TRIAL ATTORNEY*
CHRISTOPHER LICATA,
Superseding Case Information:
Defendant. /
-----------------
Court Division: (Select One) Newdefendant(s) OYes ONo
• Miami • Key West 0FTL Number of new defendants
(Z]WPB • FTP Total number ofcounts
1. I have carefully considered the allegations of the indictment, the number of defendants, the number of probable
witnesses and the legal complexities of the Indictment/Information attached hereto.
2. I am aware that the information supplied on this statement will be relied upon by the Judges of this Court in
setting their calendars and scheduling criminal trials under the mandate of the Speedy Trial Act,
Title28 U.S.C. Section 3161.
3. Interpreter: (Yes or No) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
List language and/or dialect _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
4. This case will take -1i days for the parties to try.
5. Please check appropriate category and type of offense listed below:
(Check only one) (Check only one)
I 0 to 5 days _o_ Petty _Q_
II 6 to 10 days _0_ Minor _Q_
Ill 11 to 20 days _o_ Misdemeanor _Q_
IV 21 to 60 days _o_ Felony _Q_
V 61 days and over _o_
6. Has this case previously been filed in this District Court? (Yes or No) _N_o_ _ _ _ _ _ __
If yes: Judge _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Case No. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
(Attach copy of dis positive order)
__o_ _ _ _ _ _ __
Has a complaint been filed in this matter? (Yes or No)N
If yes: Magistrate Case No.
Related miscellaneous numbers: - - - - - - - - -
Defendant( s) in federal custody as of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Defendant(s) in state custody as of _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Rule 20 from the District of - - - - - - - - -
Is this a potential death penalty case? (Yes or No) _N_o_ _ _ _ _ _ __
7. Does this case originate from a matter pending in the Central Region of the U.S. Attorney's Office prior to
August 9, 2013 (Mag. JudgeAliciaO. Valle)?(YesorNo) _N_o_ _ _ _ _ __
8. Does this case originate from a matter pending in the Northern Region of the U.S. Attorney's Office prior to
August 8, 2014 (Mag. Judge Shaniek Maynard? (Yes or No) _N_o_ _ _ _ _ __
9. Does this case originate from a matter pending in the Central Region of the U.S. Attorney's Office prior to
October 3, 2019 (Mag. Judge Jared Strauss)? (Yes or No) _N_o_ _ _ _ _ __
OJ Trial Attorney
Court ID No. 5520601
*Penalty Sheet(s) attached REV 3/19/21
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 32 of 33
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENALTY SHEET
Defendant's Name: CHRISTOPHER LICATA
Case N o : · - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Count#: 1
Title 18, United States Code, Section, 1349
Conspiracy to Commit Health Care Fraud and Wire Fraud
*Max Penalty: Twenty (20) years' imprisonment
Counts #: 2-6
Title 18, United States Code, Section 134 7
Health Care Fraud
*Max Penalty: Ten (10) years' imprisonment as to each count
Count#: 7
Title 18 United States Code Section 371
Conspiracy to Defraud the United States and to Pay and Receive Health Care Kickbacks
*Max Penalty: Five (5) years' imprisonment
Counts#: 8 - 12
Title 42, United States Code, Section 1320a-7b(b)(2)(A)
Payment of Kickbacks in Connection With a Federal Health Care Program
*Max Penalty: Ten (10) years' imprisonment as to each count
*Refers only to possible term of incarceration, does not include possible fines, restitution,
special assessments, parole terms, or forfeitures that may be applicable.
Case 9:21-cr-80063-DMM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/23/2021 Page 33 of 33
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENALTY SHEET
Defendant's Name: CHRISTOPHER LICATA
Case No:
------------------------------
Counts #: 13 - 15
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1957(a)
Money Laundering
*Max Penalty: Ten (10) years' imprisonment as to each count
Counts#: 16- 17
Title 18 United States Code Section 1343
Wire Fraud
*Max Penalty: Twenty (20) years' imprisonment as to each count
*Refers only to possible term of incarceration, does not include possible fines, restitution,
special assessments, parole terms, or forfeitures that may be applicable.
File and source
- File
- 3.pdf
- Size
- 950,303 bytes
- SHA-256
- aa8cc4ea8a36d00e7839b0ab5dfa3c113fe0c9380c71eb6042602d85e3e71d44
- Our copy
- 3.pdf
- Original
- archive.org