Score:   1
Docket Number:   SD-TX  4:18-cr-00620
Case Name:   USA v. Joseph A. Isaacs et al
  Press Releases:
HOUSTON – A 53-year-old Houston man has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud for his participation in a scheme to defraud Dr. Pepper Snapple Group Inc. (DPSG), announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick.

Joseph A. Isaac admitted to participating in the scheme with Anna Maria Sites, 42, of Friendswood, from 2010 through Feb. 17, 2015, by not paying rebates to those who had requested them.

Isaac was the majority shareholder of FulFill Plus Inc., which administered the DPSG rebate campaigns. The rebates included returned bottle caps or for switching to DPSG brand drinks in restaurant/convenience store soda dispensers. DPSG paid FulFill to administer those campaigns.

Isaac admitted the fraud caused a loss to DPSG of $1,058,445.

U.S. District Judge Gray Miller will impose sentencing Dec. 4, 2019. At that time. Isaac faces up to five years in prison and a possible $250,000 maximum fine. 

He was permitted to remain on bond pending that hearing.                     

The FBI conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney John Braddock is prosecuting the case.

HOUSTON – The 42-year-old Friendswood woman charged with committing fraud against a popular beverage company has admitted her guilt, announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick.

Anna Maria Sites pleaded guilty today before U.S. Magistrate Judge Nancy Johnson to conspiracy to commit mail fraud against Dr. Pepper Snapple Group Inc. (DPSG).

Sites admitted to participating in the scheme from 2010 through Feb. 17, 2015, by not paying rebates to those who had requested them. Sites handled human resources and accounting for FulFill Plus Inc., which administered the DPSG rebate campaigns. The rebates included returned bottle caps or for switching to DPSG brand drinks in restaurant/convenience store soda dispensers. DPSG paid FulFill to administer those campaigns.

Specifically, in 2014 and 2015, FulFill administered a DPSG program known as 2014 Fast Start, which paid a $75 rebate for switching to a DPSG drink in soda dispensers. DPSG paid $125,000 for FulFill to manage this campaign. Sites was responsible for rebates not being issued. Only after receiving multiple complaints would she arrange for the monies to be dispersed.

Sites sent rebate fund reports for the 2014 Fast Start rebate program to DPSG, which falsely represented that rebates were being paid when, in truth, they were not.

DPSG suffered a financial loss as a result of the scheme Sites committed. The court will determine that official amount at the time of sentencing.  

U.S. District Judge Gray Miller will impose sentencing Dec. 4, 2019. At that time. Sites faces up to five years in prison and a possible $250,000 maximum fine.  

She was permitted to remain on bond pending that hearing.                      

The FBI conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney John Braddock is prosecuting the case.

HOUSTON – Two people have been charged with conspiracy to commit mail fraud and mail fraud for their participation in a scheme to defraud Dr. Pepper Snapple Group Inc. (DPSG), announced U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Patrick.

Authorities took Joseph A. Isaac, 52, of Houston, into custody today, He is expected to make his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Nancy Johnson at 2:00 p.m. Co-defendant Anna Maria Sites, 41, of Friendswood, is expected to make her initial appearance in the near future.

The indictment, returned under seal Oct. 17 and unsealed today, alleges Isaac and Sites defrauded DPSG from 2010 through Feb. 17, 2015. The pair worked at FulFill Plus Inc., a company which  administered rebate campaigns for DPSG, according to the charges.

DPSG paid money to Fulfill Plus to fund rebates for those who had requested them. However, the rebates were not paid, according to the indictment. Isaac and Sites allegedly used the money not paid out in rebates for their own personal expenses and non-rebate related expenses of FulFill Plus. 

​Conspiracy to commit mail fraud carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment, upon conviction. Each also faces up to 20 years for each count of mail fraud. Both charges also carry a potential $250,000 maximum fine.

​The FBI investigated. Assistant U.S. Attorney John Braddock is prosecuting the case.

An indictment is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence.

A defendant is presumed innocent unless convicted through due process of law.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18TTSR-VQ9hT7YIGtt9Rha64PafTjW9iwFLfmTf40GYA
  Last Updated: 2024-04-09 22:53:36 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