Score:   1
Docket Number:   ED-MI  2:19-cr-20026
Case Name:   United States of America v. Kakireddy et al
  Press Releases:
Eight individuals from around the country who were charged with conspiracy to commit visa fraud and harboring aliens for profit, have been sentenced, announced United States Attorney Matthew Schneider. 

Schneider was joined in the announcement by Special Agent in Charge Vance Callender of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Detroit.

Sentenced were:

Barath Kakireddy, 30, of Lake Mary, FL, sentenced to 18 months;                 

Suresh Kandala, 32, of Culpeper, VA, sentenced to 18 months;

Phanideep Karnati, 36, of Louisville, KY, sentenced to 6 months;

Prem Rampeesa, 27, of Charlotte, NC, sentenced to 12 months and one day;                     

Santosh Sama, 29, of Fremont, CA, sentenced to 24 months;                       

Avinash Thakkallapally, 29, of Harrisburg, PA, sentenced to 15 months

Aswanth Nune, 27, of Atlanta, GA, sentenced to 12 months and one day;                  

Naveen Prathipati, 27, of Dallas, TX, sentenced to 12 months and one day                      

According to court records, from approximately February 2017 through January 2019, the defendants, a group of foreign citizens, conspired with each other and others to fraudulently facilitate hundreds of foreign nationals in illegally remaining and working in the United States by actively recruiting them to enroll into a metro Detroit private university that, unbeknownst to the conspirators, was operated by HSI special agents as part of an undercover operation.  As part of the scheme, the defendants/recruiters assisted foreign citizen “students” in fraudulently obtaining immigration documents from the school and facilitated the creation of false student records, including transcripts, for the purpose of deceiving immigration authorities. The illegal documents obtained as a result of the conspirators’ actions were based on false claims, false statements, and fraud since the purported foreign students had no intention of attending school, nor attended a single class, and were not bona fide students. All participants in the scheme knew that the school had no instructors or actual classes. The defendants intended to help shield and hide their customers/”students” from United States immigration authorities for money and collectively profited in excess of a quarter of a million dollars as a result of their scheme.

“As this case shows, the well-intended international student visa program can be exploited and abused,” stated United States Attorney Matthew Schneider. “These foreign “students” weren’t students at all – they were scam artists trying to stay in our country illegally, and they all fully knew there were no classes to attend.”

“Today’s sentencing of the final criminal defendant in HSI’s University of Farmington investigation makes it unequivocally clear that every individual who participated in this scheme knew it was an illegal pay-to-stay scam,” said Vance Callender, HSI Detroit special agent in charge.  “Building off lessons learned from the September 11 attacks, HSI is dedicated to protecting the homeland in part by ensuring the integrity of the Student Visa Program so it can continue to benefit everyone.  Unscrupulous schools whose sole motive is profit and not education do exist and this investigation not only exposed these types of criminals, but has helped create a feeling of omnipresence by law enforcement that will make others think twice before exploiting the program.”

Since 2015, the case was investigated by special agents from the Detroit HSI field office.

The case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ronald Waterstreet, Timothy McDonald and Brandon Helms with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan in Detroit.

Three  indictments were unsealed today charging eight individuals from around the country with conspiracy to commit visa fraud and harboring aliens for profit, announced United States Attorney Matthew Schneider.  Six of the defendants were arrested in metro Detroit. Two others were arrested in Lake Mary, Florida; and Culpeper, Virginia.

Schneider was joined in the announcement by Special Agent in Charge Steve Francis of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Detroit.

Charged in the indictments were:

Barath Kakireddy, 29, of Lake Mary, FL                     

Suresh Kandala, 31, of Culpeper, VA

Phanideep Karnati, 35, of Louisville, KY

Prem Rampeesa, 26, of Charlotte, NC                     

Santosh Sama, 28, of Fremont, CA                       

Avinash Thakkallapally, 28, of Harrisburg, PA

Aswanth Nune, 26, of Atlanta, GA.                     

Naveen Prathipati, 26, of Dallas, TX                         

According to the indictments, from approximately February 2017 through January 2019, the defendants, a group of foreign citizens, conspired with each other and others to fraudulently facilitate hundreds of foreign nationals in illegally remaining and working in the United States by actively recruiting them to enroll into a metro Detroit private university that, unbeknownst to the conspirators, was operated by HSI special agents as part of an undercover operation.  As part of the scheme, the defendants/recruiters assisted foreign citizen “students” in fraudulently obtaining immigration documents from the school and facilitated the creation of false student records, including transcripts, for the purpose of deceiving immigration authorities. The illegal documents obtained as a result of the conspirators’ actions were based on false claims, false statements, and fraud since the purported foreign students had no intention of attending school, nor attended a single class, and were not bona fide students. All participants in the scheme knew that the school had no instructors or actual classes. The defendants intended to help shield and hide their customers/”students” from United States immigration authorities for money and collectively profited in excess of a quarter of a million dollars as a result of their scheme.

“We are all aware that international students can be a valuable asset to our country, but as this case shows, the well-intended international student visa program can also be exploited and abused,” stated United States Attorney Matthew Schneider.

“Homeland Security Investigations special agents uncovered a nationwide network that grossly exploited U.S. immigration laws. These suspects aided hundreds of foreign nationals to remain in the United States illegally by helping to portray them as students, which they most certainly were not. HSI remains vigilant to ensure the integrity of U.S. immigration laws and will continue to investigate this and other transnational crimes,” said Special Agent in Charge Francis.

If convicted, the defendants face a statutory maximum penalty of five years in federal prison. 

Since 2015, the case was investigated by special agents from the Detroit HSI field office.

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ronald Waterstreet, Timothy McDonald and Brandon Helms with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan in Detroit.

An indictment is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt. Every defendant is entitled to a fair trial in which it will be the government’s burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UUhMjKakuzQA2Y-yEUSwjUkuSto-kK2eC4ZYrzzZq0M
  Last Updated: 2023-10-20 13:33:16 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The number of days from the earlier of filing date or first appearance date to proceeding date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from proceeding date to disposition date
Format: N3

Description: The number of days from disposition date to sentencing date
Format: N3

Description: The code of the district office where the case was terminated
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant at the time the case was closed
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense that carried the most severe disposition and penalty under which the defendant was disposed
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with TTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with TTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The code indicating the nature or type of disposition associated with TTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The number of months a defendant was sentenced to prison under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A code indicating whether the prison sentence associated with TTITLE1 was concurrent or consecutive in relation to the other counts in the indictment or information or multiple counts of the same charge
Format: A4

Description: The number of months of probation imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N4

Description: A period of supervised release imposed upon a defendant under TTITLE1
Format: N3

Description: The fine imposed upon the defendant at sentencing under TTITLE1
Format: N8

Description: The total prison time for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and prison time was imposed
Format: N4

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E