Indictment — United States v. Ameet Goyal, 19 Cr. 844 (CS) (S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. 21
Summary
Indictment, Document 21, filed 06/26/20, in Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS, 19 Cr. 844 (CS), against Ameet Goyal, opening with Count One (Health Care Fraud). It alleges that from at least in or about January 2010 up to and including at least in or about March 2017, Goyal, the defendant, and others known and unknown participated in a scheme to defraud patients, the Medicare Program, and private insurance plans with respect to billing for ophthalmologic medical services. It states that Goyal billed at least approximately $8 million for certain supposedly performed surgical procedures. Count Three is headed False Statements Relating to Health Care Matters, and the indictment includes forfeiture allegations and a Substitute Assets Provision.
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. Ameet Goyal, 19 Cr. 844 (CS) (S.D.N.Y.), Dkt. 21.”
Original at archive.org. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/court-filing-s-d-n-y-no-7-19-cr-00844-dkt-21-s-d-n-y-578d127e94/
, SHA-256 cef057c8449b7a9ebdfeea0d1e4a6262a4734d94b14351bc96238d3507905182.Full text
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 1 of 27
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V.
SUKERSSDING INDIC'FI^EENT
AMEET GOYAL/
31 19 Cr. 844 (CS)
Defendant
x
COUNT ONE
(Health Care Fraud)
The Grand Jury charges:
OVERVIEW OF THE FRAUDULENT SCHEME
1. From at least in or about January 2010 up to and
including at least in or about March 2017 (the ^Relevant Time
Period^)/ AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant^ and others known and unknown/
participated in a scheme to defraud patients^ the Medicare Program/
and private insurance plans with respect to billing for
ophthalmologic medical services.
2. In order to effectuate the scheme/ among other
things/ AMEET GOYAL, the defendant/ submitted and caused to be
submitted false and fraudulent claims to the Medicare Program and
private insurance plans, including claims for services to patients
that were not rendered/ claims that misrepresented the services
provided^ and claims that falsely billed for a level of service
higher or more complicated than the level performed. In addition/
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 2 of 27
AMEET GOYAL^ the defendant^ sent bills to individual patients for
services that were not rendered,. that misrepresented the services
provided/ and that falsely billed for a level of service higher or
more complicated than the level performed.
3. During the course of the scheme,, AMEET GOYAL/ the
defendant/ billed the Medicare Program/ private insurance plans/
and patients at least approximately $8 million .for certain
supposedly performed surgical procedures, including orbitotomies^
conjunctivoplasties performed in parallel to orbitotomies/ and
excisions and repair of eyelid. GOYAL and his ophthalmology
Practice received over $3 million in payments for such claims. A
substantial portion of these claims contained fraudulent billing
for procedures not performed.
a;HE DEB'ENDAin1 J^ND RBLEVANT PEHSONS AND ENTITIES
4. At all times relevant to this Indictment/ AMEET
GOYAL^ the defendant/ was. an ophthalmologist dnd oculoplastic
surgeon/ certified by the American Board of Ophthalmology/ and
licensed to practice medicine in New York State.
5. At all times relevant to this Indictment/ AMEET
GOYAL/ M.D. P.C,^ (doing business as Eye Associates Groups Rye Eye
Associates/ and other business names/ and collectively/ the
vtPractice//) , was an ophthaliaology and oculoplastic medicine
practice that operated an office in Rye/ New York. At certain
2
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 3 of 27
times relevant to this Indictment/ the Practice also operated
ophthalmology practices in Wappingers Falls and Mt. Kiscor New
York^ and Greenwich/ Connecticut.
6. AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant, formed, owned,
operated/ and practiced at the Practice. The Practice also
employed,, at various times relevant to this Indictment/ certain
other ophthalmologists and oculoplastic surgeons who reported to
GOYAL (collectively with GOYAL/ the "Ophthalmologists") .
BACKGROUND ON MEDICARE AND PRIVATE HEALTH CARE BENEFIT PROGRAMS
7. At all times relevant to this Indictment/ the
Medicare Program (nMedicare//) was a federal health care program
providing benefits to persons who are over the age of 65 or
disabled. Medicare was administered by the Centers for Medicare
and Medicaid Services (nCMS//)^ a federal agency under the United
States Department of Health and Human Services. Individuals who
received benefits under Medicare were referred to as Medicare
^beneficiaries.//
8. Medicare was a v'health care benefit program^ as
defined by Title 18^ United States Code/ Section 24(b) and
referenced in Title 18, United States Code^ Section 1347.
9. Medicare was subdivided into multiple Parts.
Medicare Pa£t B generally covered the costs of physicians^ services
and outpatient care. Generally^ Medicare Part B covered such costs
3
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 4 of 27
if, among other requirements^ they were medically necessary and
ordered by .a physician.
10. In order to bill the Medicare program/ a health
care provider was required to complete an enrollment application
and be approved to participate in the program. Once approved/ the
provider was assigned a unique Medicare provider number. Each
claim for reimbursement submitted on behalf of a health care
provider — whether in paper form or electronically — must have
identified that claimantr s Medicare provider number. Upon
enrollment/ and periodically thereafter/ each .Medicare provider
was furnished with information relevant to participating in the
program and how to bill for services rendered.
11. To receive payment from Medicare for a covered
service^ a medical provider was required to submit a claim^ either
electronically or in writing^ through Form CMS-1500 or Form UB-
92. These foxms required a provider to state a diagnosis of the
patient^ s condition and provide a procedure code (which codes are
established and published by the American Medical Association),
known as a CPT code/ identifying the service or services rendered.
The Medicare program required that a provider certify the services
rendered were medically necessary and were furnished by that
provider. Providers participating in Medicare must have agreed in
writing that they will be responsible for.the accuracy of all
4
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 5 of 27
claims submitted by themselves/ their employees or their agents^
and that all claims submitted under their provider numbers will be
accurate/ complete/ and truthful.
12. At all times relevant to this Indictment/ the
Practice submitted claims to private insurance plans/ affecting
commerce^ under which medical benefits/ items and services were
provided to individuals (collectively/ the ^Private Benefit
Programs^).
13. Each of the Private Benefit Programs is a ^health
care benefit program^ as defined by Title 18, United States Code/-
Section 24 (b) and referenced in Title 18, United States Code,
Section 1347.
14* To receive reimbursement or payment from the
Private Benefit Programs, the Practice submitted claims /. based on
CPT codes/ either electronically or in writing/ for payment of
services/ either directly or through a billing company.
SERVICES COVERED BY MEDICAKS AND THE PRXVATE BENEFIT PROGRAMS
15. Medicare and the Private Benefit Programs
(collectively^ the ^Insurance Providers^) covered the costs of
certain medical tests/ procedures^ and other medical services.
Generally, the Insurance Providers covered these costs only if/
among other requirements^ the medical services were actually
rendered and were medically necessary.
5
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 6 of 27
16. The Insurance Providers covered the costs of
ophthalraological services and oculoplastic surgery services^
including excisions of chalazions^ excision of eyelid/ full
thickness, orbitotomy/ and conjunctivoplasty.
17. At all times relevant to this Indictment/ the
Ophthalmologists in the Practice comm.only treated a minor eyelid
condition called a chalazion. A chalazion is a small/ typically
painless bump that appears on the eyelid usually due to a blocked
oil gland. Ghalazions are commonly treated with warm compresses
and gentle massage to clear up on their own. Chalazions that
require surgical intervention/ typically referred to as ^excision
of chalazion,.fr are often treated through an incision on the eyelid
and drainage — a type of eyelid surgery. An ordinary excision of
chalazion is generally performed under local numbing anesthesia
and is typically completed in less than 15 minutes.
18. Under the relevant coding guidelines for the
Insurance Providers^ an excision of chalazion must be billed under
its specific CPT code and not as some other service/ such as an
excision and repair of eyelid,. orbitotomy^ or conjunctivoplasty.
During the Relevant Time Period, AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant, billed
Insurance Providers and patients CPT codes associated with
treatment of a chalazion fewer than 40 times for his own
procedures. GOYAL billed these chalazion-related CPT codes at
6
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 7 of 27
approximately $400 and received an average payment of
approximately $200 for each of his procedures billed under those
codes.
19. An excision and repair of eyelid,, as coded under
CPT code 67 9 61, is a type of eyelid surgery involving
reconstruction or removal of certain lesions other than
chalazions. During the Relevant Time Period, AMEET GOYAL^ the
defendant/ billed Insurance Providers and patients CPT code 67961
over lr 600 times for his own procedures. GOYMi billed CPT code
67961 at approximately $1/500, and received an average payment of
approximately $500 for each of his procedures billed under that
code.
20. An orbitotomy is a significant surgical procedure
into the orbit of the eye/ often to remove an orbital tumor. A
typical orbitotomy usually requires at least monitored anesthesia
care or general anesthesiar and generally takes approximately an
hour or more to perform. An orbitotomy is a more complex;, time-
consuming^ and expensive surgery than the excision of chalazion.
During the Relevant Time Period^ AMEET GOYAL, the defendant, billed
Insurance Providers and patients CPT codes associated with an
orbitotomy over 1/400 times for his own procedures, GOYAL billed
these orbitotomy-related CPT codes at approximately $2000, and
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 8 of 27
received an average payment of approximately $950 for each of his
procedures billed under those codes.
21. A conjunctivoplasty is a procedure that generally
removes or rearranges a part of the conjunctiva/ the clear^ thin
membrane that covers a part of the front surface of the eye, and
the inner surface of the eyelids. A conjunctivoplasty is sometimes
performed to graft or extend tissue onto a conjunctival wound. It
is a different procedure than the excision of chalazion. During
the Relevant Time Period, AMEET GOYAL, the defendant/ billed
Insurance Providers and patients CPT codes associated with a
conjunctivoplasty over 700 times together with a bundled
^orbitotomy// for the same patient. GOYAL billed these bundled
conjunctivoplasty-related CPT codes at approximately $2000 or
$2/500^ and received an average payment of approximately $400 —
in addition to the orbitotomy payments — for each of his
procedures billed under those codes.
OVERVIEW OF THE HEALTH CARE FRAUD SCHEME
22. In order to effectuate the scheme to defraud^ AMEET
GOYAL/ the defendant,, and others known and unknown/, systematically
submitted claims for procedures not performed^ such as
orbitotomies/ conjunctivopiasfcies/ and excision and repair of
eyelid/ when in fact^ those surgeries were not performed/ and the
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 9 of 27
procedure actually performed was an excision of chalazion or other
similar lower-paying minor eyelid procedure.
23. To further effectuate the scheme/, among other
things/ AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant^ directed employees of the
Practice to falsify billing documents and other medical records/
by/ among other things,, characterizing excisions of chalazions and
other minor procedures as higher-paying surgeries, such as
orbitotomies with conjunctivoplasties. As part of the scheme^
GOYAL threatened the livelihood of employees of the Practice who
were reluctant to comply with these directions. GOYAL also
personally falsified certain patient raedical records/ including
his own. operating reports^ to falsely describe procedures he did
not perform in order to match his fraudulent billing claims.
24. From approximately January 2010 through
approximately March 2017, AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant/ and others
known and unknown at the Practice/ billed the Insurance Providers
and patients over $8 million for supposedly performed
orbitotomies/ parallel conjunctivopiasties^ and excisions and
repair of eyelid/ and received over $3 million in payments for
such claims. A substantial portion of these claims contained
fraudulent billing for procedures not performed.
25. The Insurance Providers paid these fraudulent
claims through^ among ways/, interstate wire transfers into a bank
9
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 10 of 27
account established and controlled by AMEET GOYAL^ the defendant^
in the Southern District of New York.
26. As part of the scheme/ AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant/
caused debt collection procedures to be initiated against multiple
patients who did not pay the full amount of fraudulently billed
procedures fchafc were not performed. •
STATUTORY ALLEGATIONS
27. From at least in or about January 2010 up to and
including in or about March 2017, in the Southern District of New
York and elsewhere/ AMEET GOYAL^ the defendant/ knowingly and
willfully executed^ and attempted to execute/ a scheme and artifice
to defraud a health care benefit program and to obtain,. by means
of false and fraudulent pretenses/ representations^ and promises^
money and property owned by^ and under the custody and control of,
a health care benefit program/ in connection with the delivery of
and payment for health care benefits, items/ and services/ to wit/
AMEET GOYAL participated in a scheme to defraud the lasurance
Providers by making materially false statements in claims for
payment for the provision of medical services.
(Title 18, United States Code/ Sections 1347 & 2.)
10
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 11 of 27
COUNT TWO
(Wire Fraud " Healthaare Fraud Scheme)
The Grand Jury further charges:
28. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through
27 of this Indictment are repeated and realleged as if fully set
forth herein.
29. From at least in or about January 2010 up to and
including in or about March 2017, in the Southern District of New
York and elsewhere,. AMEET GOYALy the defendant, willfully and
knowingly/ having devised and intending to devise a scheme and
artifice to defraud^ and for obtaining money and property by means
of false and fraudulent pretenses^ representations and promises,
and attempting to do sor transmitted and caused to be transmitted
by means of wire/ radio/ and television communication in interstate
and foreign commerce/ writings/ signs/ signals/ pictures/ and
sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme and artifice^ to
wit/ AMEET GOYAL participated in a scheme to defraud the Insurance
Providers and the patients by making and causing others to make
materially false statements in claims for payment for the provision
of medical services/ and in furtherance thereof/ AMEET GOYAL caused
wire communications to be sent in interstate commerce/ including
through electronic claims made to Insurance Providers and payments
received from Insurance Providers.
11
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 12 of 27
(Title 18, United States Code/ Sections 1343 & 2.)
COUNT THREE
(False Statements Relating to Health Care Matters)
The Grand Jury further charges:
30. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through
29 of this Indictment are repeated and realleged as if fully set
forth herein.
31. From at least in or about January 2010 up to and
including in or about March 2017, in the Southern District of New
York and elsewhere/ AMEET GOYM^ the defendant^ in matters
involving health care benefit programs, and in connection with the
delivery of and payment for health care benefits^ items^ and
services,, willfully and knowingly did falsify/ conceal/ and cover
up by tricky scheme/ and device/ material facts, and make
materially false/ fictitious/ and fraudulent statements and
representations/ and did make and use materially false writings
and documents knowing the same to contain materially false/
fictitious, and fraudulent statements and entries/ to wit/ AMEET
GOYAL made and caused others to make materially false statements
to the Insurance Providers in claims for payment for the provision
of medical services.
(Title 18, United States Code/ Sections 1035 & 2.)
12
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 13 of 27
COUNT FOtm
(Bank B1raud)
The Grand Jury further charges:
32. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through
31 of this Indictment are repeated and realleged as if fully set
forth herein.
33. On November 21, 2019, an original indictment (the
^Original Indictment//) was returned in the action United States of
America v. Ameet Goyal, 19 Cr. 844 (CS) (S.D.N.Y.). The Original
Indictment charged AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant, with the same three
counts as listed in Counts Oner Two/ and Three of this superseding
Indictment: healthcare fraud/ wire fraud,. and making false
statements relating to healthcare matters/ in violation of Title
18, United States Code/ Sections 1347, 1343, 1035, and 2.
34. On November 22, 2019, AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant,
was arraigned on the Original Indictment and placed on release
pursuant to an order dated November 22, 2019^ from the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York^ which
order notified GOYMj of the potential effect of committing a
criminal offense while on pretrial release.
BACKGROUND ON SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION X.ENDXNG IN RESPONSE
TO COVXD-19
35. The United States Small Business Administration
(the vtSBA^/) is a federal agency of the Executive Branch that
13
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 14 of 27
administers assistance to American small businesses. This
assistance includes guaranteeing loans that are issued by certain
lenders to qualifying small businesses . Under the SBA loan
guarantee programs/ the actual loan is issued by a commercial
lender/ but the lender receives the full faith and credit backing
of the United States Federal Government on a percentage of the
loan. Therefore/ if a borrower defaults on an SBA-guaranteed loan/
the commercial lender may seek reimbursement from the SBA/ up to
the percentage of the guarantee. By reducing the risk to
commercial lenders, the SBA loan guarantee programs enable lenders
to provide loans to qualifying small businesses when financing is
otherwise unavailable to them on reasonable terms through normal
lending channels. When a borrower seeks an SBA-guaranteed loan/
the borrower must meet both the commercial lenderf s eligibility
requirements for the loan as well as the SBAf s eligibility
requirements.
36. The Coronavirus Aid/ Relief^ and Economic Security
P'CARES//) Act is a federal law enacted on March 29, 2020 designed
to provide emergency financial assistance to the millions of
J\mericans who are suffering the economic effects caused by the
COVID-19 pandemic. One source of relief provided by the CARES Act
was the authorization of up to $349 billion in forgivable loans to
small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses
14
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 15 of 27
through the Paycheck Protection Program (the nPPP'/) . On April 24 r
2020^ the Paycheck Protection.Program and Health Care Enhancement
Act was signed into law, authorizing over $300 billion in
additional PPP funding. On June 5/ 2020^ the Paycheck Protection
Program Flexibility Act (vtPPPPA//) was signed into law, amending
certain terms of the PPP.
37. As of the relevant dates of the Loans discussed
below i. the PPP allowed qualifying small businesses and other
organizations to receive unsecured SBA-guaranteed loans with a
maturity of two years and interest rate of one percent. PPP loan
proceeds must be used by businesses on payroll costs/ mortgage
interest^ rent/ and/or utilities. The PPP allowed the interest
and principal to be forgiven if businesses spend the proceeds on
these expenses within eight weeks of receipt and use at least 75%
of the forgiven amount for payroll. Pursuant to the CARES Act/
the amount of PPP funds a business was eligible to receive was
determined by the number of employees employed by the business and
their average payroll costs. The maximum loan amount was
generally limited to 2.5 times the business/ s average monthly
payroll expenses. Businesses applying for a 3?PP loan must provide
documentation to confirm that they have in the past paid employees
the compensation represented in the loan application. Eligible
businesses must have been in operation on or before February 15,
15
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 16 of 27
2020 and either had paid employees or independent contractors.
Businesses must have been overseen by the SBA^ which has authority
over all PPP loans/ but individual PPP loans are issued by approved
commercial lenders who receive and process PPP applications and
supporting documentation/ and then make loans using the lenders^
own funds.
38. Applicants with pending criminal charges are
ineligible for PE)P loans. Question Five on the PPP borrower
application form (the ^Pending Charges Question^) requires the
applicant to answer ^Yes// or ^No// to the following question: vlls
the Applicant (if an individual) or any individual owning 20% or
more of the equity of the Applicant subject to an indictment^
criminal information/ arraignment/ or other means by which formal
criminal charges are brought in any jurisdiction^ or presently
incarcerated^ or on probation or parole?^
39. An applicant is required to initial his or her
response to the Pending Charges Question.
40. The PPP borrower application expressly advises that
if the Pending Charges Question is answered n'lYes/'I// then ^the
loan will not be approved.^
41. The PPP borrower application also requires the
applicant to make and place his or her initials by the following
certifications^ among others:
16
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 17 of 27
a. ^During the period beginning on February 15^
2020 and ending on December 31, 2020, the Applicant has not and
will not receive another loan under the Paycheck Protection
Program."; and
b. vtl further certify that the information
provided in this application and the information provided in all
supporting documents and forms is true and accurate in all material
respects. I understand that knowingly making a false statement to
obtain a guaranteed loan from SBA is punishable under the law/
including under 18 USC 1001 and 3571 by imprisonment of not more
than five years and/or a fine of up to $250^000; under 15 USC 645
by imprisonment of not more than two years and/or a fine of not
more than $5/000; and/ if submitted to a federally insured
institution^ under 18 USC 1014 by imprisonment of not more than
thirty years and/or a fine of not more than $1/000,000.//
OVEBVXEW OF THB PAYCHECK PROTECTION PROGRAM FRAUD
42. On or about April 21, 2020, AMEET GOYAL, the
defendant^ applied for a loan (^Loan-l//) under the PPP from a
financial institution headquartered in Manhattan/ New York (^Bank-
1//) . The loan application for Loan~l (the ^Loan-1 Application^)
sought a $358/700 PPP loan for the business "Ameet Goyal/// doing
business as ^Eye associates. //
17
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 18 of 27
43. Loan-1 Application represented the applicant as a
C-corporation with a business address in Rye/ New York (^Business
Address-l//) . As the applicant^ s business identification number/
the Loan-1 Application listed AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant's/ own
social security number.
44. Loan~l Application listed x'Ameet Goyal^ as the
President and 100% owner of the applicant.
45. On or about April 29, 2020, AMEET GOYAL, the
defendant/ applied for a second loan (^Loan-2//) from Bank-1 under
the PPP/ this time in the amount of $278^500. The loan application
for Loan-2 (the ^Loan-2 Application7') represented the applicant as
^Rye eye associates.^
46. Loan-2 Application represented the applicant as a
sole proprietorship located at Business Address-1/ the same
address as that of the business listed in the Loan-1 Application.
For the applicants business identification number/ the Loan-2
Application listed a number that is the Employer Identification
Number for Ameet Goyal ND PC.
47. Loan-2 Application listed "Ameet Goyal// as the
President and 100% owner of the applicant.
48. In connection with the Loan-1 Application/ AMEET
GOYAL, the defendant,, submitted to Bank-1 a payroll report for his
business/ printed on April 7^ 2020 (the ^Payroll Report//). The
18
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 19 of 27
Payroll Report is titled "CARES SBA-PPP: Employee Detail From:
01/01/19' To: 12/31/19,tr identifies the underlying business as
Ameet Goyal MD PC/ provides the names and payroll expenses for
each employee^ and represents the businesses per-employee payroll
expenditures for each month of 2019r with an average 2019 monthly
payroll cost of $97/272/77 for the business.
49. Although the Loan~2 Application purported to be for
a different loan, with a different loan amount/ to a different
business name/ with a different business identification number
than the business in the Loan-1 Application/ AMEET GOYAL/ the
defendant/ submitted the exact same Payroll Report in support of
the Loan-2 Application to Bank-1.
50. On both Applications/ AMEET GOYAL, the defendant,
answered ^o/r to the Pending Charges Question/ and electronically
placed his initials nAGff directly under his ^Noff response.
51. In each of the Applications^ AMEET GOYAL/ the
defendant/ stated ox certified/ in substance and in part, the
following:
a. Ameet Goyal/ as the applicant or owner of
applicant/ is not an owner o£ any other business/ and does not
have common management with any business other than the listed
applicant;
19
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 20 of 27
b. Neither the applicant nor any individual
owning 20% or more of the equity of the applicant was subject to
an indictment, criminal information, arraignment^ or other means |
j
by which formal criminal charges are brought in any jurisdiction/
or presently incarcerated^ or on probation or parole;
c. During the period beginning on February 15,
2020 and ending on December 31, 2020,, the applicant has not and
will- not receive another loan under the Paycheck Protection
Program;
d, The information provided in the loan
application and in all supporting documents and forms is true and
accurate in all material respects; and
e, Arneet Goyal understood that knowingly making
a false statement to obtain a guaranteed loan from the SBA is
punishable under the law.
52. AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant/ electronically signed
and submitted each of the Applications to Bank-1.
53. Following submission of the Applications^ Bank-1
advised AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant^ that the respective
Application was approved by the SBA/ and that the applicant would
need to execute a loan note in order for the loan to be funded.
54. Bank-l/s signing instructions to each loan note
advised/ ^REMINDER: The Small Business Administration/ in
20
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 21 of 27
consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury/ has determined
that no eligible borrower may receive more than one PP3? loan. A
one loan per borrower limitation is necessary to help ensure that
as many eligible borrowers as possible obtain PPP loans. If you
have already received a PPP loan/ you may not execute a loan note
for another.^ (Emphasis in original.)
55. On or about May 3/ 2020, AMEET GOYAL, the defendant/
electronically executed the loan note for Loan-1 in the amount of
$358,700.
56. On or about May 2 and 4/ 2020, AMEET GOYAL, the
defendant/ executed multiple identical versions of the loan note
for Loan"2 in the amount of $278/500.
57. Bank-1 funded Loan-1 in full to a bank account
controlled by AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant/ ending in digits 6891
(the "Goyal Account//) on or about May 4, 2020.
58. Bank-1 funded Loan-2 in full to the Goyal Account
on or about May 11, 2020.
STATUTORY AliLEGATIONS
59. From at least in or about April 2020 through at
least in or about June 2020,. in the Southern District of New York
and elsewhere^ while AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant^ was on release
pursuant to an order of the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, dated on or about November 22, 2019^
21
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 22 of 27
issued pursuant to Title 18, United States Code/ Section 3142(c),
AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant/ willfully and knowingly executed/ and
attempted to executer a scheme and artifice to defraud financial
institutions/ the deposits of which were insured by the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation (1"F1DIC//) , and to obtain moneys^
funds/ credits, assets^ securities/ and other property owned by/
and under the custody and control of^ such financial institutions/
by means of false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, and
promises^ to wit,. GOYAL engaged in a scheme to obtain over $630,. 000
in Government-guaranteed loans for the Practice from an FDIC-
insured bank through the E>PP by means of false and fraudulent
pretenses^ representations^ and documents.
(Title 18, United States Code/ Sections 1344, 3147(1), and 2.)
COUNT FIVE
(Making E'alse Statements to a Bank)
The Grand Jury further charges:
60. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through
59 of this Indictment are repeated and realleged as if fully set
forth herein.
61. From at least in or about April 2020 through at
least in or about June 2020, in the Southern District of New York
and elsewhere^ while AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant/ was on release
pursuant to an order of the United States .District Court for the
22
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 23 of 27
Southern District of New York^ dated on or about November 22, 2019,
issued pursuant to Title 18^ United States Code/ Section 3142(c)/,
AMEET GOYAL, the defendant^ knowingly made false statements and
reports and willfully overvalued land, property/ and security^ for
the purpose of influencing the actions of financial institutions^
the accounts of which were insured by the FDIC/ in connection with
an application/ advance/ discount/ purchase, purchase agreement/
repurchase agreement/ commitment/ and loan/ to wit/ GOYAL made
false statements to an FDIC-insured bank regarding^ among other
things/ GOYAL and the Practice/s eligibility for a PPP loan/ the
absence of any pending criminal charges against GOYMj^ and
certification not to obtain more than one PPP loan/ for the purpose
of obtaining over $630^000 in Government-guaranteed loans for the
Practice through the PPP.
(Title 18, United States Code/ Sections 1014, 3147(1), and 2.)
COUNT SIX
(Making False Statements)
The Grand Jury further charges:
62. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through
59 of this Indictment are repeated and realleged as if fully set
forth herein.
63. From at least in or about April 2020 through at
least in or about June 2020, in the Southern District of New York
23
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 24 of 27
and elsewhere^ while AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant/ was on release
pursuant to an order of the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York/ dated on or about November 22, 2019,
issued pursuant to Title 18, United States Code,. Section 3142(c)/
AMEET GOYALf the defendant/ in a matter within the jurisdiction of
the executive branch of the Government of the United States,
knowingly and willfully made a materially false^ fictitious/ and
fraudulent statement and representation and made and used a false
writing and document knowing the same to contain a materially
false/ fictitious/ and fraudulent statement and entry/ to wit/
GOYAL made false statements to the SBA regarding/ among other
things/ GOYAL and the Practice's eligibility for a PPP loan^ the
absence of any pending criminal charges against GOYAL/ and
certification not to obtain more than one PPP loan/ for the purpose
of obtaining over $630/000 in Govermnent-guaranteed loans for the
Practice through the PPP.
(Title 18, United States Code/ Sections 1001, 3147(1), and 2.)
FORFEITURE ALLEGATION
64. As a result of, committing the offenses alleged in
Counts One/ Two/ and Three of this Indictment, AMEET GOYAL/ the
defendant/ shall forfeit to the United States^ pursuant to Title
18, United States Code/ Section 982(a) (7), any and all property/
real and personal/ that constitutes or is derived/ directly or
24
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 25 of 27
indirectly/ from gross proceeds traceable to the commission of
said offensesr including but not limited to a sum of money in
United States currency representing the amount of proceeds
traceable to the commission of said offenses.
65, As a result of committing the offenses alleged in
Counts Four and Five of this Indictment^ AMEET GOYAL/ the
defendant/ shall forfeit to the United States/- pursuant to Title
18, United States Code/ Section 982 (a) (2) (A) , any and all property
constituting or derived from/ proceeds obtained directly or
indirectly/ as a' result of the commission of said offenses/.
including but not limited to a sum of money in United States
currency^ representing proceeds traceable to the commission of
said offenses.
66. As a result of committing the offense alleged in
Count Six of this Indictment, AMEET GOYAL/ the defendant/ shall
forfeit to the United States/ pursuant to Title 18, United States
Code/ Section 982(a) (3)/ any and all property constituting or
derived from, proceeds obtained directly or indirectly^ as a result
of the commission of said offense^ including but not limited to a
sum of money in United States currency,, representing proceeds
fcraceable to the commission of said offense.
Substitute Assets Provision
25
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 26 of 27
67. 'If any of the above described forfeitable property,
as a result of any act or omission of the defendants;
(a) cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence;
(b) has been transferred or sold to/ or deposited with,-
a third person;
(c) has been. placed beyond the jurisdiction of the Court;
(d) has been substantially diminished in value; or
(e) has been commingled with other property which cannot
be subdivided without difficulty;
it is the intent of the United States/ pursuant to Title 21, United
States Code, Section 853 (p) and Title 28, United States Code/
Section 2461 (c)/ to seek forfeiture of any other property of the
defendant up to the value of the above forfeitable property.
(Title 18, United States Code, Section 982;
Title 21, United States Code, Section 853; and
Title 28,.United States Code/ Section 2461.) -
^•(wM^-
FOREPERSON ""—" AUDREY J6TRAUSS
Acting "United States Attorney
26
Case 7:19-cr-00844-CS Document 21 Filed 06/26/20 Page 27 of 27
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OS* AMERICA
AMEET GOYAL/
Defendant.
SUPEHSEDING INDICTMENT
Sl 19 Cr. 844 (CS)
(^itle 18, United States Code,
Sections 1001, 1014, 1035, 1343, 1344,
1347, 3147 & 2)
AUDREY STRAUSS
Acting United States Attorney.
27
File and source
- File
- 21.pdf
- Size
- 876,350 bytes
- SHA-256
- cef057c8449b7a9ebdfeea0d1e4a6262a4734d94b14351bc96238d3507905182
- Our copy
- 21.pdf
- Original
- archive.org