Score:   1
Docket Number:   ND-OK  4:19-cr-00120
Case Name:   USA v. Ferguson
  Press Releases:
Three marketers have pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court to offering or paying illegal kickbacks to physicians in relation to the government health care insurance programs Medicare, TRICARE, and the FECA Program, announced U.S. Attorney Trent Shores

Daniel Richard Ferguson, 47, of Broken Arrow; John Richard Frohrip, 52, of Tulsa; and Kevin Ellis Partin, 49, of Bixby, were charged this month in three separate Informations with offering or paying health care kickbacks. The men caused federal health care insurance programs to pay reimbursement costs for expensive compounding drug prescriptions written by recruited doctors in return for kickback payments. The defendants would then use the reimbursed funds for their own financial gain.

“Kickback schemes undermine the integrity of government healthcare programs and raise healthcare costs for Americans. These greed fueled schemes frustrate patient-oriented decision-making because doctors make prescription and pharmacy decisions based on their personal financial enrichment,” said U.S. Attorney Trent Shores. “Professionals in the healthcare market in northern Oklahoma should be on notice by now that kickback schemes will be exposed and those involved held accountable.”

In their plea agreements, the men acknowledged offering to pay kickbacks to physicians and that on March 30, 2015, they allegedly paid a physician, Dr. John Main, of Tulsa, a $15,000 check payment from an account controlled by Brookhaven Specialty Pharmacy, LLC, which constituted a kickback in return for the physician referring patients to Brookhaven for compounding prescriptions that would be reimbursed by the federal health care program Tricare.

Violating the anti-kickback statute carries up to five years in prison and a $250,000 possible fine.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Melody N. Nelson and Richard M. Cella are prosecuting the cases. The IRS- Criminal Investigation; U.S. Postal Service- Office of Inspector General (OIG); Department of Veterans Affairs- OIG; FBI; Department of Health and Human Services- OIG; Defense Criminal Investigative Service; and Department of Labor- OIG conducted the investigation.

TULSA, Okla. – Three physicians and five marketers have been charged in U.S. District Court with violations of the federal anti-kickback statute and other criminal offenses, announced U.S. Attorney Trent Shores. The men allegedly caused federal health care insurance programs to pay reimbursement costs for fraudulent and expensive compounding drug prescriptions written by recruited doctors in return for kickback payments. The defendants would then use the reimbursed funds for their own financial gain.

“Sadly, the American taxpayer ends up paying the price when unscrupulous medical professionals fraudulently bill federal health insurance. In these cases, patients believed they were receiving a compounded cream that fit their specific medical need. In actuality, the charges allege that the drug mixtures prescribed and received by the patients were designed to line the pockets of criminally corrupt doctors with illegally begotten funds,” said U.S. Attorney Shores. “Every dollar we recover from those who defraud federal health insurance programs will be a dollar that goes back to providing healthcare for Americans served by these programs.”

Dr. Krishna Balarma Parchuri, 44, of Tulsa, is charged in a superseding Indictment along with Christopher R. Parks, 57, of Tulsa, Dr. Gary Robert Lee, 58, of Tulsa, and Dr. Jerry May Keepers, 65, of Kingwood, Texas, with conspiracy to commit health care fraud. Keepers and Parchuri are also charged with soliciting and receiving illegal bribes and kickback payments. Parchuri is further charged with obstructing the criminal investigation into the health care offenses.

The criminal indictment alleges that since November 2012, Parks and Lee, engaged in a conspiracy to unlawfully pay kickbacks and bribes to physicians in order to induce the physicians to write expensive compounding prescriptions to pharmacies they controlled, including OK Compounding LLC, in Skiatook, One Stop RX LLC in Tulsa and NBJ Pharmacy LLC and Airport McKay Pharmacy, both in Houston. The defendants then allegedly submitted large claims for payment to federal health care programs and divided the profits. The defendants are accused of causing Tricare to pay reimbursement for false claims in the total amount of $3,207, 514.97; Medicare in total of $285,776.87; FECA Program in total of $552,544.55; and CHAMPVA in total of $310,273.64.

Compounding prescriptions is a practice in which a pharmacist or physician combines ingredients of multiple drugs to create a medication that is tailored to the specific needs of a patient. These medications are prescribed when standard Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drugs are unsuitable for the patient. They are also more expensive and reimbursed at a far higher rate by federal and private insurance companies. Compounded drugs are not to be mixed or marketed in bulk.

The charges allege that, in some cases, physicians were provided pre-printed prescription pads that listed compounding formula choices. Participating physicians allegedly checked a box with their preferred selection and then faxed it directly to the associated pharmacies, rather than writing a prescription tailored to the patient who could then take it to a pharmacy of their choice.

Parchuri, an orthopedic surgeon practicing in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and a doctor of osteopathic medicine licensed in Arizona, Kansas, Oklahoma, Florida, and Texas, received kickbacks and bribes in varying amounts up to $50,000 per month from Parks and Lee in exchange for writing compounded drug prescriptions that were submitted to pharmacies controlled by the two men. 

Keepers allegedly solicited and received more than $860,000 in illegal bribe and kickback payments from Parks and Lee.

According to the indictment, kickback payments were disguised through various sham business arrangements, including contracts where physicians purported to serve as “medical directors” or “consulting physicians” for the pharmacies. Doctors were also recruited as “medical directors” for a university study. In actuality, the sham arrangements were meant to conceal the fact doctors were receiving kickback payments for writing prescriptions. Additionally, limited liability companies (“LLCs”) were created, owned and operated by the corrupt pharmacies/marketers and physicians who submitted the compounding prescriptions. After the pharmacies received payments for the illegal prescriptions, the conspirators transferred the profits to the LLCs to be divided among the conspirators.

Jonathon Yates Boyd III, 47, of Sugarland, Texas, is charged in an Information for conspiring to pay health care kickbacks. In 2012, Boyd formed R&A Marketing LLC, in Houston, Texas, and began recruiting physicians to write prescriptions for compounded drugs. From November 2012 to September 2014, Boyd conspired to pay kickbacks and bribes to physicians to induce them to write prescriptions for expensive compounded drugs and to submit those prescriptions to pharmacies controlled and operated by Parks and Lee. The conspirators then submitted large claims for payment to various federal health care programs and divided the profits from the federally-paid claims. Boyd was paid a commission based upon the reimbursed prescriptions.

The kickback payments were allegedly disguised through fraudulent business arrangements. Contracts were created between the corrupt pharmacies and physicians for services as “medical directors” or “consulting physicians” to the pharmacies. In actuality, the doctors did not provide the services. The sham arrangements were meant to conceal the fact doctors were receiving kickback payments for writing prescriptions. R&A Marketing and the pharmacies were each responsible for their prearranged portion of the kickback payments.

Daniel Richard Ferguson, 47, of Broken Arrow; John Richard Frohrip, 52, of Tulsa; and Kevin Ellis Partin, 49, of Bixby are charged in three separate Informations with offering or paying health care kickbacks. On March 30, 2015, the men allegedly paid a physician a $15,000 check payment from an account controlled by Brookhaven Specialty Pharmacy, LLC, which constituted a kickback in return for the physician referring patients to Brookhaven for compounding prescriptions that would be reimbursed by the federal health care program Tricare.

Conspiracy to violate the anti-kickback statute carries a possible maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine, while violating the anti-kickback statute carries up to 10 years in prison and a $100,000 possible fine. A conviction of health care fraud without injury or death also carries a possible maximum of 10 years in prison, but if resulting in injury or death, the maximum penalty climbs to 20 years or life in prison, respectively.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Melody N. Nelson and Richard M. Cella are prosecuting the cases. The Department of Labor- Office of Inspector General (OIG), IRS - Criminal Investigation, U.S. Postal Service- OIG, Department of Veterans Affairs- OIG, FBI, the Department of Health and Human Services-OIG, and Defense Criminal Investigative Service conducted the investigation.

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 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