Full text
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 796 Filed 02/21/25 Page 1 of 5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v. 22-CR-124 (3) (NEB/DTS)
MAHAD IBRAHIM,
Defendant.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v. 22-CR-222 (NEB/DTS)
LIBAN YASIN ALISHIRE, ET AL.,
Defendants.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v. 22-CR-223 (NEB/DTS)
AIMEE MARIE BOCK, ET AL.,
Defendants.
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 796 Filed 02/21/25 Page 2 of 5
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v. 22-CR-224 (NEB/DTS)
QAMAR AHMED HASSAN, ET AL.,
Defendants.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v. 24-CR-13 (NEB/DTS)
SAID EREG, ET AL.
Defendants.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v. 24-CR-15 (NEB/DTS)
IKRAM YUSUF MOHAMED, ET AL.
Defendants.
2
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 796 Filed 02/21/25 Page 3 of 5
AMENDED ORDER SETTING TRIALS
On July 25, 2024 this Court issued an order scheduling trial for the remaining
defendants it this “Feeding Our Future” financial fraud scheme. The Court is reviewing
these cases monthly to keep the cases moving and on track for trial. Due to the number
of cases and defendants left to try, other criminal trials scheduled before the Court, cases
and defendants that no longer require a trial and anticipated length of the remaining
trials, this Order resets date‐certain trials, with the amended trial dates stated below.
The Court HEREBY ORDERS the following trial schedule. The parties and
attorneys involved in each case are to be prepared and available for trial on these dates.
1. United States v. Aimee Bock, et al. (22‐cr‐223): February 3, 2025 through September
5, 2025. Based on the size of the courtroom and other logistical considerations, the
Court cannot try all 12 defendants in this case together. The Court has grouped the
defendants as follows:
a. February 3 – March 14, 2025 Amy Marie Bock (1) and Salim Ahmed Said (3);
b. April 14 – May 5, 2025 Abdihakim Ali Ahmed (7), Abdikadir Ainanshe
Mohamud (9), and Hamdi Hussein Omar (12) ; and
c. August 11 – September 5, 2025 (Ahmed Mohamed Artan (8), Abdinasir
Mahamed Abshir (10)1, Asad Mohamed Abshir (11),
Ahmed Abdullahi Ghedi (13), and Abdirahman Mohamud Ahmed (14).
The dates listed above are date certain; however, if a prior trial runs long, then the
start date could be moved slightly. While the Court intends to take a break between
each block of defendants in this this case, the Court will be trying other criminal cases
1
Defendant Abdinasir Mahamed Abshir’s (10) and Asad Mohamed Abshir’s (11) joint motion to continue the April
14, 2025 trial date due to personal travel (ECF No. 483) is GRANTED. Both Defendants have been moved to the
next trial block now starting on August 11, 2025
3
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 796 Filed 02/21/25 Page 4 of 5
in‐between. To accommodate anticipated conflicts, the Court generally will not hold
trial on Fridays, but will assess this plan during trial. The Court will issue an amended
trial notices to adjust the Defendants now scheduled in each trial block.
2. United States v. Mahad Ibrahim (22‐cr‐124‐3): April 14, 2025 – May 5, 2025. To
accommodate anticipated conflicts, the Court generally will not hold trial on Fridays,
but will assess this plan during trial. The Court has issued a trial notice with trial
document deadlines with this date.
3. United States v. Ahmed Yasin Ali and Khadar Jigre Adan (22‐cr‐222): September 8,
2025 through October 3, 2025. To accommodate anticipated conflicts, the Court
generally will not hold trial on Fridays, but will assess this plan during trial.
The Court has issued a trial notice with trial document deadlines with this date.
4. United States v. Qamar Ahmed Hassan, et al. (22‐cr‐224): October 6, 2025 through
October 31, 2025. To accommodate anticipated conflicts, the Court generally will not
hold trial on Fridays. The Court has issued a trial notice with trial document deadlines
with this date.
5. United States v. Ereg, et al. (24‐13): To be determined after pretrial motions have
been completed.
6. United States v. Ikram Yusuf Mohamed (24‐cr‐15): To be determined after pretrial
motions have been completed.
The above‐referenced cases are all related as part of a larger “Feeding our Future”
alleged financial fraud scheme, under which the government have charged 70 defendants
to date. Early on, these cases were designated as complex for purposes of the Speedy Trial
Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 316(h)(7)(B)(ii), based on the large volume of discovery, the
nature of the evidence collected, and the sheer number of defendants. In some cases, the
4
CASE 0:22-cr-00124-NEB-DTS Doc. 796 Filed 02/21/25 Page 5 of 5
Court has granted multiple requests from the parties to continue motion hearings,
continue trials, or for additional briefing.
Based on the complexity of the cases, the nature of the cases as related, the timing of
when the cases are official trial read, to give adequate time for counsel to prepare and to
ensure continuity of counsel, especially those that represent multiple defendants, the
Court finds that the ends of justice served by the granting of these continuances outweigh
the best interest of the public and the Defendants in a speedy trial. The Court thus
continues to exclude the speedy trial time from the date of this order, until each trial date
listed above by the Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A)2.
Dated: February 21, 2025 BY THE COURT:
s/Nancy E. Brasel
Nancy E. Brasel
United States District Judge
2
Time was excluded from these cases on 7/25/24 until the trial date certain in the last order filed. The Court
continues to exclude the time until trial.
5