Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Aboshady

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts

March 29, 2017

United States of America
v.
Moustafa Moataz Aboshady, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM & ORDER

          NATHANIEL M. GORTON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Defendant Moustafa Moataz Aboshady (“defendant” or “Aboshady”) has been indicted on 1) one count of conspiracy to make false statements and to conceal in connection with health care benefit programs, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 and 2) two counts of false statements in connection with health care benefit programs, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1035. The indictment also includes a criminal forfeiture allegation.

         Currently before the Court is defendant's motion to reassign his case to the United States District Judge who has been presiding over a case involving his uncle. For the reasons that follow, the motion will be denied.

         I. Background

         At relevant times, defendant, who has a medical degree from Egypt, worked with his uncle, Fathalla Mashali (“Mashali”) at New England Pain Associates (“NEPA”). Mashali was indicted in March, 2014 on charges relating to an alleged scheme to defraud several Medicare providers. The case was assigned to United States District Judge Rya W. Zobel.

         In April, 2015, a grand jury returned a second superseding indictment against Mashali charging him with violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1347 (health care fraud), 1349 (conspiracy to commit mail fraud) and 1957 (money laundering). Approximately two years later, in March, 2017, Mashali pled guilty to several counts in the indictment. United States v. Mashali, No. 14-10067, ECF No. 329 (D. Mass. Mar. 15, 2017).

         Aboshady was indicted on September 27, 2016 on charges stemming from his alleged involvement in that same scheme. His case was randomly assigned to this session.

         II. Defendant's Motion for Reassignment

         A. Legal Standards

         1. The Current Local Rule 40.1(I)

         Local Rule 40.1(I) permits a United States District Judge to return a case to the Clerk for reassignment. It states:

In the interest of justice or to further the efficient performance of the business of the court, a judge may return a case to the clerk for reassignment, whether or not the case is related to any other case, with the approval of the Chief Judge, or, with respect to civil cases only, may transfer the case to another judge, if the other judge consents to the transfer.

         2. The Amended Local Rule 40.1(I)

         In February, 2016, the Clerk of Court, Robert M. Farrell, published a proposed amendment to Local Rule 40.1(I) for public comment. The amended version of Local Rule ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.