Score:   1
Docket Number:   SD-CA  3:18-cr-00432
Case Name:   USA v. Collins et al
  Press Releases:
Assistant U. S. Attorneys Benjamin J. Katz and Mark W. Pletcher (619) 546-9604 and (619) 546-9714

 

NEWS RELEASE SUMMARY – January 26, 2018

 

SAN DIEGO – Jimmy Collins and Ashley Collins, a married couple living in Cleveland, Tennessee were arraigned in federal court today on charges that they operated a health care fraud scheme that bilked TRICARE – the health care program that covers United States service members, retirees, and their dependents – out of more than $65 million in pharmacy reimbursement funds.

According to the indictment, Jimmy and Ashley Collins conspired with CFK, Inc., the owner of The Medicine Shoppe, a pharmacy based in Bountiful, Utah, to submit fraudulent claims for compounded medications mailed mainly to active duty Marines and Sailors based in the Southern District of California.

“San Diego is a military town. This indictment sends a message to those who seek to defraud the Department of Defense out of the dollars meant to care for our military members and their families:  Fraudsters will be held accountable here,” said U.S. Attorney Adam L. Braverman.

 

“The theft of military health care dollars directly ‎harms the U.S. Government and our warfighters and will not be tolerated,” said Michael Mentavlos, Special Agent in Charge, Southwest Field Office, Defense Criminal Investigative Service. “Today's indictment demonstrates that DCIS, in partnership with NCIS, IRS, and the FBI, will aggressively pursue those who seek to steal Department of Defense resources.”

 

“Fraud is criminal abuse of the system that siphons resources away from the American warfighter, said Todd Battaglia, Special Agent in Charge of the NCIS Field Office at Camp Pendleton. “NCIS will continue to work with our law enforcement partners to hold responsible those who would defraud our nation to line their own pockets.”

 

Compounded medications are specialty medications mixed by a pharmacist to meet the specific medical needs of an individual patient. Although compounded drugs are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), they are properly prescribed when a physician determines that an FDA-approved medication does not meet the health needs of a particular patient, such as if a patient requires a particular dosage or application or is allergic to a dye or other ingredient.

 

According to the indictment, between October 2014 and July 2015, Jimmy and Ashley Collins operated a network of recruiters working to induce TRICARE beneficiaries to obtain compounded medications, which cost an average of more than $14,500 per medication per month, from The Medicine Shoppe. To induce TRICARE beneficiaries to sign up to receive these compounded medications, recruiters working for the Collinses were told to inform potential beneficiaries that they would be paid to evaluate the medications as part of an ongoing medical study.  In reality, no study was taking place, the indictment said.

 

Once a recruiter convinced a TRICARE beneficiary to sign up to receive the compounded medications, the straw beneficiary’s information was sent to Choice MD, a Tennessee medical clinic co-owned and operated by the Collinses.  Doctors employed by the Collinses at Choice MD then wrote prescriptions for the TRICARE beneficiaries, despite never examining the patients in person.  Once signed by the doctors, these prescriptions were not given to the straw beneficiaries, but sent directly to The Medicine Shoppe or related pharmacies, which filled the prescriptions and billed TRICARE at exorbitant prices.

 

Between December 2014 and May 9, 2015 – the day that TRICARE stopped reimbursing for compounded medications – doctors working for the Collinses authorized 4,442 prescriptions that were filled at The Medicine Shoppe.  The Medicine Shoppe billed TRICARE $65,679,512 for these prescriptions.

 

The owners of The Medicine Shoppe then paid kickbacks to the Collinses based on the number of prescriptions referred by the Collinses recruiter network.  Between February and July 2015, these kickback payments to the Collinses totaled at least $45.7 million dollars.  The Collinses, in turn, paid kickbacks to the recruiters working as part of their network.  Six of these kickback payments, including one for more than $1.4 million, form the basis for the six counts of Payment of Illegal Remuneration brought against Jimmy and Ashley Collins in the indictment.

 

The indictment also includes a lengthy list of forfeitable funds, property, and items purchased by the Collinses with the proceeds of the scheme.  Included among these items is an 82-foot yacht, multiple luxury vehicles (including two Aston-Martins), dozens of pieces of farm equipment and tractor-trailer trucks, and three pieces of Tennessee real estate.

 

Jimmy and Ashley Collins were arraigned today in the Eastern District of Tennessee.  Their next court appearance is on February 2, 2018 in San Diego, before Magistrate Judge William J. Gallo.

 

DEFENDANTS                                            Case Number 18-cr-0432-JLS                                            

Jimmy D. Collins                                            Age: 53                                   Cleveland, TN

Ashley Collins                                                 Age: 31                                   Cleveland, TN

CFK, Inc.                                                                                                        Utah based corporation

 

SUMMARY OF CHARGES

 

Count 1:

Conspiracy to Commit Health Care Fraud – Title 18, U.S.C § 1349

Maximum penalty: 10 years’ imprisonment and fine of higher of $250,000 or double loss amount

 

Counts 2-7:

Illegal Payment of Remuneration – Title 42 U.S.C. § 1320(a)-7b(b)(2)

Maximum penalty (per count): 5 years’ imprisonment; $250,000 fine

 

AGENCY

 

Defense Criminal Investigative Service

Naval Criminal Investigative Service

IRS Criminal Investigation Division, Gulfport, MS

Federal Bureau of Investigation - Jackson, MS Field Office

 

*The charges and allegations contained in an indictment or complaint are merely accusations, and the defendants are considered innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15sUPYla8jwNjFIvpU8y0rAda0Z1wcmts4EBzNLiRt7E
  Last Updated: 2024-04-08 03:22:49 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 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 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