Score:   1
Docket Number:   ND-AL  2:18-cr-00103
Case Name:   USA v. Ifediba et al
  Press Releases:
BIRMINGHAM – A March indictment unsealed today charges four people in connection to a $7.8 million health care fraud conspiracy at a Birmingham clinic, and charges that the husband and wife physicians who operated the clinic used it, in part, as a “pill mill.”

U.S. Attorney Jay E. Town, FBI Special Agent in Charge Johnnie Sharp Jr., and Drug Enforcement Administration Assistant Special Agent in Charge Bret Hamilton announced the charges.

The 44-count indictment returned March 30 charges Dr. PATRICK EMEKA IFEDIBA, 59, his wife, Dr. UCHENNA GRACE IFEDIBA, 53, both of Shelby County, Patrick Ifediba’s sister, NGOZI JUSTINA OZULIGBO, 48, of Trussville, and CLEMENT ESSIEN EBIO, 60, of Hoover, with the health care fraud conspiracy. It brings other charges against the various defendants, including unlawful drug distribution conspiracy and money laundering conspiracy. A federal judge unsealed the 44-count indictment following Patrick Ifediba’s arrest.

“The opioid crisis in the United States accounts for the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans every year,” Town said. “Physicians who pocket millions while taking advantage of patients, many of whom are addicted to opioids, and unnecessarily drive up health care costs for both patients and insurance providers, knowingly sacrifice the efficacy of care for greed,” Town said. “Physicians who engage in this illicit practice will soon be trading their white coats for prison stripes.”

“The FBI and our partners will continue to pursue and bring to justice those who violate their Hippocratic Oath for greed and needlessly destroy lives, families and communities,” Sharp said.

 

“DEA has dedicated an entire enforcement group to investigating drug dealers who hide behind medical degrees in the state of Alabama, and as long as we have doctors in this state who base their decisions on profits versus best medical care, we will continue to do so,” Hamilton said. “DEA agents and task force officers have been investigating the Ifedibas and their coconspirators for three years. This is a testament to the dedication and patience of these investigators and should be a warning to any medical providers who would resort to fraud and illegal prescribing.”

“As alleged, the indictment describes schemes motivated by unbridled greed in which the doctors allegedly used their prescribing authority to force unwilling, but ultimately opioid-dependent, patients to submit to unnecessary allergy testing and treatment in exchange for narcotics prescriptions,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Mohammad Khatib. “Such conduct is not only anti-medicine; it is a crime for which justice demands a serious response.”

The charges all stem from the defendants’ association with Care Complete Medical Clinic, a private clinic at 1300 Bessemer Road in Birmingham that provided allergy and pain management services. The indictment charges that the four defendants stole millions of dollars from health care programs by fraudulently billing for allergy treatments and services. Apart from the health care fraud conspiracy and scheme, Uchenna Ifediba is further charged with one count of false statements in connection with health care matters.

Drs. Patrick and Uchenna Ifediba also are charged as part of an unlawful drug distribution conspiracy. The husband and wife team churned out prescriptions for schedule II controlled substances – opioid painkillers – for no legitimate medical purpose in order to maximize personal financial gain, according to the indictment. The pair also face one count of maintaining drug-involved premises for allegedly operating CCMC, in part, as a pill mill. Patrick Ifediba also faces 14 counts, and Uchena Ifediba, five counts, of unlawful distribution of controlled substances.

Patrick Ifediba and Ozuligbo are further charged as part of a money laundering conspiracy. Among other violations, the siblings moved the proceeds of CCMC’s unlawful health care fraud and pill mill scheme in order to hide the illicit nature of the funds, according to the indictment. Dr. Patrick Ifediba faces an additional three counts of concealment money laundering, and four counts of engaging in monetary transactions in criminally derived property valued at more than $10,000. The indictment charges Uchenna Ifediba and Ozuligbo with three counts and one count, respectively, of concealment money laundering.

The charges of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and health care fraud both carry maximum penalties of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Making false statements related to health care matters carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Conspiracy to distribute controlled substances and distribution of controlled substances both carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $1 million fine. Maintaining drug-involved premises carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $500,000 fine.

Money laundering conspiracy and laundering of monetary instruments both carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Engaging in monetary transactions in criminally derived property worth more than $10,000 carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000 or twice the amount of the criminally derived property involved.

The FBI and DEA investigated the case, which Assistant U.S. Attorneys Khatib and Jim Weil are prosecuting.

An indictment carries only charges. Defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

 

ifediba indictment

###

 

 

 

BIRMINGHAM – A federal jury today convicted Dr. PATRICK EMEKA IFEDIBA, 60, of Shelby County and Patrick Ifediba’s sister, NGOZI JUSTINA OZULIGBO, 49, of Trussville of numerous crimes stemming from their involvement with Care Complete Medical Clinic, located in Birmingham, Alabama, announced U.S. Attorney Jay E. Town, FBI Special Agent in Charge Johnnie Sharp Jr., and Drug Enforcement Administration Assistant Special Agent in Charge Clay Morris. 

Following a four-week trial before Judge David R. Proctor, the jury convicted Ifediba of thirty-five counts involving unlawful drug distribution, health care fraud, and money laundering.  Specifically, Ifediba was convicted of: (i) one count of conspiracy to illegally distribute controlled substances by means of prescriptions; (ii) fourteen counts of illegal prescribing; (iii) one count of maintaining drug-involved premises; (iv) one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud; (v) ten counts of health care fraud; (vi) one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering; (vii) three counts of concealment money laundering; and (viii) four counts of engaging in monetary transactions involving criminally derived property greater than $10,000.

For her part in the offenses, Ozuligbo, a licensed practical nurse, was convicted of twelve counts involving health care fraud and money laundering.  Specifically, Ozuligbo was convicted of: (i) one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud; (ii) nine counts of health care fraud; (vi) one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering; and (vii) one count of concealment money laundering.  No sentencing date has been set. 

“This jury verdict should put all health care providers on notice that sacrificing care for greed will land you in federal court,” Town said.  “And we have bed space in federal prison for all that do.”

 “In defrauding the Medicare system, Ifediba violated a sacred oath taken by physicians but above all he violated the law,” Sharp said.  “He submitted fraudulent claims to both Medicare and other health care insurers as part of the scheme.  The FBI and our partners will continue to hold medical professionals accountable for abusing positions of trust in the community and for harming the financial integrity of our health care system.  The FBI remains dedicated to combating health care fraud and to doing our part in reducing the impact that opioids have on our nation.”

“Today, a jury of community members resoundingly confirmed what DEA had known all along,” Morris said.  “Dr. Ifediba had long forgotten to care for his patients.  Instead, he chose to fill his bank accounts with cash.  Sadly, Dr. Ifediba is yet another example of putting profit over his professional responsibility to help those in need.  For over three years, DEA and our law enforcement colleagues investigated and ultimately prosecuted Dr. Ifediba for violations of many federal laws including drug distribution and money laundering.  Collectively, we are committed to protecting our communities from the scourge of opioid abuse and those who profit from it.  We will tirelessly protect the innocent and vigorously investigate those who prey on the addictions of others.”

Evidence at the trial proved that Ifediba was a doctor of internal medicine who owned Care Complete Medical Clinic (“CCMC”) and operated it with his wife, Dr. Uchenna Ifediba.  The evidence showed that the doctors operated CCMC as a pill mill.  They routinely prescribed dangerous and addictive opioids for the primary purpose of making money from repeated return office visits.  Ifediba not only overprescribed opioids, he also prescribed dangerous cocktails of drugs, including one called “the holy trinity,” that produces a heroin-like high, but creates a significant risk of an overdose.  Although Ifediba was not a pain management specialist and CCMC did not hold itself out as a pain management clinic, approximately 85% of its patients received opioid prescriptions.

In addition to operating a pill mill, the evidence showed that Ifediba and others, including Ozuligbo, cheated and stole millions of dollars from Medicare and private health insurers in connection with an allergy fraud scheme.  Although neither had any training in allergy medicine, the pair would order patients with health insurance to take allergy tests and submit to allergy treatments they didn’t need.  Ifediba even forced some patients to take unwanted allergy tests by withholding their opioid prescriptions if they refused.  Ifediba then ordered expensive allergy therapy treatments for all these patients even when the patients tested negative.

The purpose of the allergy scheme was to increase CCMC’s revenue.  CCMC billed health insurers more than $7.8M over the course of the scheme.  Representatives of Medicare and several private insurance companies testified at trial.  The evidence showed that Ifediba billed one of the private insurers nearly $3M for allergy services over a two-and-a-half year period.  Ifediba was their number one biller in the state of Alabama, accounting for sixty-one percent of all allergy-related billing.  The insurance company’s next highest biller was an allergy and asthma center employing eight doctors and nine nurse practitioners.

The evidence at trial showed that Ifediba opened numerous bank accounts and used shell corporations in order to hide the money he made from his crimes.  Ifediba moved the illicit funds between bank accounts and used the names of family members, including Ozuligbo, to make it appear as though the bank accounts and companies belonged to someone else.  A substantial portion of these illicit funds were used to buy a condominium, annuities, and other investments held in the names of others, but which were for Ifediba’s personal use and benefit.

The charges of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and health care fraud both carry maximum penalties of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Conspiracy to distribute controlled substances and distribution of controlled substances both carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $1 million fine. Maintaining drug-involved premises carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $500,000 fine.

Money laundering conspiracy and laundering of monetary instruments both carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.  Engaging in monetary transactions in criminally derived property worth more than $10,000 carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000 or twice the amount of the criminally derived property involved.

The FBI and DEA investigated the case as part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force operation, which Assistant U.S. Attorneys Mohammad Khatib and Jim Weil are prosecuting.

 

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

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

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

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3

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

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE4
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE4
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE4
Format: A3

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

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE5
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE5
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE5
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 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